AMD vs Nvidia: Who Makes the Best GPUs?
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
AMD vs Nvidia. If you’re building a gaming PC, you’ll inevitably be faced with choosing between the two GPU heavyweights. Both companies make GPUs that power the best graphics cards, fighting for supremacy in our GPU benchmarks hierarchy. AMD vs Nvidia isn’t the only decision you’ll need to make when building a PC, of course. You’ll also need to choose between AMD vs Intel CPUs. Our focus here will be on graphics, however, and we’ll be looking at performance, features, drivers and software, power and efficiency, pricing and more.
The AMD vs Nvidia flame wars have been cooking since the late 90s, with Nvidia currently leading in the GPU arena by many metrics. Its graphics cards account for the majority of GPUs on the Steam Hardware Survey, for example, and in terms of pure finances, Nvidia is worth roughly three times as much as AMD (with a large chunk of AMD’s resources devoted to CPUs).
But we’re not interested in the distant past or finances. We want to find a winner in the current battle of AMD vs Nvidia GPUs. That primarily means looking at AMD Big Navi and Nvidia Ampere graphics cards — and maybe one of these days, we’ll even need to add Intel Arc into the mix.
It’s important to keep the big picture in view throughout this analysis. We’re not just focusing on the fastest GPU, or the most power-efficient GPU, or the best bang-for-the buck GPU. We’ll consider all of the factors in each category, from budget to mid-range to high-end and extreme GPUs, along with the tech behind the GPUs. We will declare a winner today, but of course this isn’t the end of the war. It’s more like owning the heavyweight GPU title: A victory today doesn’t mean your opponent won’t come back leaner and meaner next year.
With that preamble out of the way, let’s pull out the boxing gloves and go the rounds with AMD vs Nvidia.
AMD vs Nvidia: Gaming Performance
For decades, faster GPUs have enabled game developers to create increasingly detailed and complex worlds.
While you can find everything from budget GPUs to high-end offerings from both AMD and Nvidia, when it comes to outright performance, Nvidia has a slight overall lead thanks to the chunky GeForce RTX 3090 Ti.
Beyond the pole position, however, it’s a closer match. If you look at our GPU benchmarks hierarchy, you’ll see that AMD’s RX 6950 XT owns the top spot at 1080p and 1440p, and Nvidia only wins at 4K or in ray tracing games. Of the top ten fastest GPUs, four are AMD and six are Nvidia, but part of that is thanks to quantity rather than truly different GPUs — the RTX 3080 12GB takes a bit of RTX 3080 Ti and a bit of RTX 3080 and mixes them together into a card that ended up matching the 3080 Ti at a lower price point.
Of course, the main benchmarks only look at games running APIs and settings that work on all GPUs, which means we haven’t included ray tracing or DLSS in the results. We also haven’t included any FSR results, and CPU bottlenecks certainly play a role at lower resolutions.
Here’s the updated 2022 performance rankings, showing the overall performance from eight games and four settings/resolutions combinations four our standard test suite, and four more charts for our ray tracing suite that uses six complex DXR (DirectX Raytracing) games.
Image 1 of 8
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware) (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware) (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware) (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware) (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware) (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware) (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)Nvidia’s RTX 3090 Ti isn’t remotely affordable, while the GeForce RTX 3080 and Radeon RX 6800 XT represent a better view of performance. Those two trade blows in traditional rasterization games, with AMD taking a slight lead, while Nvidia easily jumps ahead — often by a large margin — as soon as ray tracing and/or DLSS get turned on. We give Nvidia a slight lead at the top of the performance ladder, but that’s not the only category to consider.
Looking at the mainstream market ($400, give or take), things get a bit messy. AMD’s Radeon RX 6700 XT takes on the GeForce RTX 3060 Ti, with slightly better performance — provided once again that we ignore RT and DLSS. In our review, we called it a net tie. However, while AMD’s card theoretically costs 20% more than Nvidia’s offering, in practice pricing actually favors AMD right now ($480 vs. $500 at the time of writing).
Older model GPUs are mostly outclassed by the new arrivals, so the best pairing would be pitting the RTX 3050 against the RX 6600, both of which can be had for around $300 (never mind MSRPs). AMD’s GPU crushes the 3050 in standard gaming performance by 25–35%, and while ray tracing does favor the Nvidia GPUs by 7–15%, that’s far less critical for this category.
What about budget offerings, like stuff for under $200? Sadly, we have to wonder where all the good budget GPUs have gone. The RX 6500 XT and RX 6400 sell for under $200, but performance is generally worse than the old RX 5500 XT 8GB and GTX 1660, instead going up against the GTX 1650 and 1650 Super.
AMD’s cards are easy enough to find brand new, while Nvidia’s GTX 16-series parts are now coming up on three years old and supply and availability can be a bit spotty. Still, Newegg has GTX 1650 Super for $200, effectively making the budget sector a tie.
Winner: Tie This is simply too close to call, as there are so many ways to split things. Nvidia wins for 4K and ray tracing performance, AMD wins for standard 1080p and 1440p gaming, and also in performance at similar high-end and mid-range price points. DLSS also counts in Nvidia’s favor, however, and while FSR 2.0 might be relatively competitive, it works on any GPU.
AMD vs Nvidia: Power Consumption and Efficiency
Prior to AMD’s Navi, GPU power efficiency was decidedly in favor of Nvidia. But Navi changed all that, and Big Navi has further improved AMD’s efficiency. Using chips built with TSMC’s 7nm FinFET process and a new architecture that delivered 50% better performance per watt, Navi started to close the gap.
Except, it was so far behind that even a 50% improvement didn’t fully address the efficiency deficiency.
But Nvidia’s Ampere architecture pushed higher clocks at the cost of efficiency, while AMD’s Big Navi gets a healthy boost in efficiency from the Infinity Cache. The net result is that Ampere and Big Navi are pretty close to tied.
Using Powenetics hardware to capture the real graphics card power use of GPUs, we’ve tested all of the current and recent graphics cards from both companies. We’ve also tested third party cards from both sides, but we’ll confine the charts to the reference designs as much as possible.
Image 1 of 2
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)While power use favored Nvidia’s older GPUs, sometimes by a wide margin, the differences on the latest generation hardware go the other way. RTX 3090 Ti uses the most power, followed by the RX 6950 XT, RTX 3080 12GB (custom card), and then we get the RTX 3090, 3080 Ti, and 3080.
AMD’s RX 6900 XT and 6800 XT come next, before we start getting to previous generation GPUs.
It’s more difficult to declare a winner outside of the extreme performance range. AMD’s RX 6700 XT uses a bit more power than the RTX 3060 Ti and a bit less than the RTX 3070, but they’re all in a 10W range. Drop down to the RTX 3060 and RTX 3050 against the RX 6600 XT and RX 6600, and power use tracks pretty closely with performance.
Among budget GPUs, the RX 6500 XT uses more power than the GTX 1650, but the RX 6400 is the only truly modern GPU that doesn’t need at least a PCIe 6-pin power connector.
Winner: AMD Focusing just on the current generation AMD Big Navi and Nvidia Ampere GPUs, power and efficiency are relatively close. AMD takes a slight lead at the top, the middle’s a tie, and AMD wins in the budget sector as well, giving it the overall nod. TSMC’s N7 process also factors in, helping out AMD, while Nvidia’s use of Samsung 8N likely accounts for reduced overall efficiency.
AMD vs Nvidia: Featured Technology
Most of the features supported by AMD and Nvidia seem similar, though the implementations do vary. Both support ray tracing now, which allows for some nice effects, but it’s not required to get a good gaming experience. Nvidia’s DLSS is a bigger factor, as FidelityFX Super Resolution (FSR) doesn’t look as good in the FSR 1.0 implementation, while FSR 2.0 isn’t widely adopted yet — and in either case, FSR works on AMD and Nvidia GPUs, and even Intel integrated graphics. That’s actually a point to AMD for not locking people into its hardware, but practically speaking there are a lot of games with DLSS support and it can be an nice extra.
There are other aspects as well. G-Sync takes on FreeSync, Radeon Anti-Lag goes up against Nvidia’s ultra-low latency mode plus Reflex, Radeon Super Resolution (RSR) works in a similar way to Nvidia Image Scaling (NIS), and there other areas where features effectively match up as well.
These aren’t the rays you’re looking to trace. (Image credit: Shutterstock)
Supporting the same APIs and similar hardware features doesn’t make things equivalent, however. Ampere and RDNA2 also support mesh shaders and variable rate shading (VRS), as well as some other features that are all part of the DirectX 12 Ultimate spec. But Nvidia’s performance in ray tracing tends to be quite a bit higher than AMD, even without DLSS.
While FreeSync and G-Sync might seem equivalent on the surface, the best G-Sync displays are almost invariably higher quality and better latency than FreeSync displays. The same goes for AMD’s anti-lag and Nvidia’s ultra-low latency and Reflex: Similar in theory, but in practice Reflex implementations come out on top.
Video encoding and decoding are another important aspect, and here Nvidia definitely comes out ahead. The Turing and Ampere codecs support higher-quality encodes and lower GPU utilization, both good things. There’s no need for CPU-based video encoding with Nvidia’s latest GPUs.
AMD’s budget Navi 24 chips lack some key video encoding features as well.
There is one area where AMD has a clear advantage, though it’s also perhaps to AMD’s detriment. TSMC’s N7 process that AMD uses for RDNA2 (and RDNA and Zen 3 and the PS5/XSX) chips clearly delivers better performance and power characteristics than Samsung’s custom 8N (really just an improved version of Samsung’s 10LPP process). The catch being that lots of other companies also want to partake of TSMC’s goodness — AMD, Apple, Nvidia GA100, Qualcomm, and even Intel all use TSMC, along with various other smaller players. This becomes a problem when TSMC doesn’t have enough capacity to meet the demands of all of those companies.
Winner: Nvidia While AMD and Nvidia have superficial parity on most features, Nvidia’s implementations are generally superior — and cost more. G-Sync, Reflex, DLSS, and NVENC all end up being at least slightly better than AMD’s alternatives.
AMD vs Nvidia: Drivers and Software
Trying to determine a clear winner in the drivers and software category is difficult.
Quite a few people previously encountered black screen issues with AMD drivers on RX 5000 Navi series GPUs, while others didn’t have any difficulties. Newer drivers have fixed these problems, as far as we can tell. Nvidia drivers aren’t foolproof either, and depending on the game and hardware, issues crop up for both companies. But is one company doing better with drivers?
(Image credit: Shutterstock)
AMD makes a lot of noise about its yearly driver overhaul. The Radeon Adrenalin 2020 drivers consolidated everything under one large umbrella, aiming to simplify things, though it can be confusing at first if you’re used to the older drivers. AMD tends to skip WHQL (Windows Hardware Quality Labs) testing, which means fewer hoops to jump through and potentially more bugs slip through, but Microsoft’s insurance of a minimum level of functionality doesn’t really mean much for gaming purposes.
You can generally count on at least one new AMD driver per month, often more if there are major game launches.
Nvidia’s driver schedule follows a similar cadence. You’ll get new drivers for major game launches or new graphics card hardware. Nvidia’s releases (outside of rare hotfixes) are all WHQL certified, and Nvidia also has a separate Studio Driver branch for content creators.
One of the big differences between AMD and Nvidia drivers is that Nvidia has two separate user interfaces. The Nvidia Control Panel handles things like resolutions and certain graphics settings, while GeForce Experience tackles game optimizations, driver updates, and extra features including ShadowPlay, Ansel, NIS, and more. Annoyingly, you have to log in and solve a captcha prompt to use GeForce Experience, which is something I’ve done more times than I’d ever want to count. Just say no to data mining plus drivers.
Winner: Tie We prefer AMD’s unified driver approach, as it’s one less interface to navigate, but there’s just so much stuff in the current releases. Nvidia’s Q&A is arguably better, though plenty of bugs and issues end up slipping through on both sides.
Quantifying drivers ends up being an incredibly subjective affair, however, so we’re calling this one a draw as well.
AMD vs Nvidia: Pricing and Availability
Who offers the better value in the battle of AMD vs Nvidia? The past two years have been a bit of a joke (not a funny one, either), but things are now greatly improved. You can find all the latest graphics cards in stock at retail now, with many models selling at or below MSRP. But of the «many» selling at or below MSRP, far more are using AMD GPUs than Nvidia GPUs, with only the extremely priced RTX 3080 Ti and above selling below MSRP from Team Green.
Our GPU pricing index looks at eBay pricing as an alternative, but it’s no longer required. In general, the simple fact is that the best values are currently from AMD, with the RX 6600, RX 6600 XT, RX 6650 XT, RX 6700 XT, and RX 6750 XT all ranking near the top of the FPS per dollar charts. Nvidia’s RTX 3060, 3050, and 3060 Ti aren’t horribly option, but you’re paying about 15–25% more in terms of FPS per dollar (and getting DLSS for that money).
(Image credit: Shutterstock)
At the top of the pricing spectrum, the RTX 3090 Ti is the unquestioned worst value, priced at over $1,800 and only delivering slightly more performance than the RTX 3080 Ti. AMD’s RX 6950 XT doesn’t cost nearly as much and competes well against the 3080 Ti, but as we go down the pricing scale things begin to favor AMD a lot more.
Right now, the RX 6600 takes top honors with around 0.23 fps per dollar spent. Nvidia’s highest ranking GPUs come from its previous generation Turing RTX 20-series, where the RTX 2060 scores 0.196 FPS/$, but the highest RTX 30-series part only rates 0.176 FPS/$. AMD’s RX 6500 XT is right in the mix for a budget card, also at 0.176 FPS/$.
Winner: AMD With the supply of graphics cards greatly improving, at least partly thanks to cryptocurrency mining profitability being in the dumps, the value proposition finally becomes meaningful again for the first time in about two years. GPU prices continue to drop, but for now AMD’s RX 6000-series cards represent a better value than Nvidia’s RTX 30-series parts.
| Round | Nvidia GeForce | AMD Radeon |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming Performance | ✗ | ✗ |
| Power Consumption | ✗ | |
| Featured Technology | ✗ | |
| Drivers and Software | ✗ | ✗ |
| Price and Value | ✗ | |
| Total | 3 | 4 |
With an overall score of four to three, AMD squeaks out a victory and lays claim to the king of the GPU world crown. Cue the band and light the fireworks. That doesn’t mean AMD GPUs are a better choice in every case, and there’s a lot of fuzzy math and subjectivity involved, but you should be well served by Team Red’s RDNA 2 GPUs — and just about equally well served by Team Green.
Overall, which GPU you prefer will likely come down to personal preference rather than hard numbers. AMD clearly wins most match ups (comparing similar priced cards) in standard benchmarks, but it falls behind in ray tracing games and DLSS still factors in.
We could certainly see people being willing to pay 10–15% more money to get an Nvidia card, even if it may not technically be the «best» choice.
At this point, we’re now looking forward to the future RDNA 3 and Ada Lovelace graphics cards, both of which we expect to see before the end of the year. There are still too many unknowns to even venture a guess at who will be on top by the end of the year, but hopefully the end of 2022 ends up being far better for gamers looking to upgrade their GPU than 2020 and 2021 were.
Jarred Walton is a senior editor at Tom’s Hardware focusing on everything GPU. He has been working as a tech journalist since 2004, writing for AnandTech, Maximum PC, and PC Gamer. From the first S3 Virge ‘3D decelerators’ to today’s GPUs, Jarred keeps up with all the latest graphics trends and is the one to ask about game performance.
Topics
AMD
Nvidia
AMD Radeon RX 6400 Review: Budget in Almost Every Way
Tom’s Hardware Verdict
The Radeon RX 6400 represents the lowest performance «modern» GPU we’ve seen, but cuts too many features and doesn’t reduce pricing enough to truly qualify as the budget card it’s supposed to be.
The only real draw is if you want a half-height GPU or don’t want a 6-pin power connector.
Pros
- +
Doesn’t need a power cable
- +
Cards are in stock
- +
Good for 1080p medium
- +
Half-height options if you want them
Cons
- —
Not much cheaper than RX 6500 XT
- —
Trades blows with 3-years-old GTX 1650
- —
Meaningless ray tracing hardware
- —
Weak video codec hardware
The AMD Radeon RX 6400 should be the last ‘new’ GPU we’ll see before the next-generation architectures slated to launch before the end of the year. Officially launched as an OEM-only product at the start of the year, AMD and its partners later decided to sell the cards on the retail market. It’s not going to make our list of the best graphics cards, but if your primary requirement is a GPU that doesn’t need a 6-pin or 8-pin power connector or a modern GPU that can be found in a half-height form factor, this is it.
Still, we wanted to include it in our GPU benchmarks hierarchy, and it does fill a potential market niche.
We purchased this PowerColor ITX card at retail because no one wanted to send us a review sample. It sounds a bit like Intel’s Arc A380 right now, though at least you can find the RX 6400 in the US market. We opted for the dual-slot model, mostly because that should represent the maximum level of performance you’re likely to see from the GPU, whereas a half-height card might end up running a bit slower.
The primary competition for the RX 6400 consists of Nvidia’s older GTX 1650 Super and GTX 1650, along with AMD’s previous-gen RX 5500 XT and the slightly more expensive RX 6500 XT. Here’s how the specifications stack up.
| Graphics Card | RX 6400 | RX 6500 XT | RX 5500 XT 4GB | GTX 1650 Super | GTX 1650 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Architecture | Navi 24 | Navi 24 | Navi 14 | TU116 | TU117 | |
| Process Technology | TSMC N6 | TSMC N6 | TSMC N7 | TSMC 12FFN | TSMC 12FFN | |
| Transistors (Billion) | 5. 2) |
107 | 107 | 158 | 284 | 200 |
| SMs / CUs | 12 | 16 | 22 | 20 | 14 | |
| GPU Cores | 768 | 1024 | 1408 | 1280 | 896 | |
| RT Cores | 12 | 16 | N/A | N/A | N/A | |
| Boost Clock (MHz) | 2815 | 2815 | 1717 | 1725 | 1665 | |
| VRAM Speed (Gbps) | 16 | 18 | 14 | 12 | 8 | |
| VRAM (GB) | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 6 | |
| VRAM Bus Width | 64 | 64 | 128 | 128 | 128 | |
| ROPs | 32 | 32 | 32 | 48 | 32 | |
| TMUs | 48 | 64 | 88 | 80 | 56 | |
| TFLOPS FP32 (Boost) | 4.3 | 5.8 | 4.8 | 4.4 | 3 | |
| Bandwidth (GBps) | 128 | 144 | 224 | 192 | 128 | |
| PCIe Link | Gen4 x4 | Gen4 x4 | Gen4 x8 | Gen3 x16 | Gen3 x16 | |
| TDP (watts) | 53 | 107 | 130 | 100 | 75 | |
| Launch Date | Jan 2022 | Jan 2022 | Dec 2019 | Nov 2019 | Apr 2019 | |
| Launch Price | $159 | $199 | $159 | $159 | $149 | |
| Online Price | $159. 99 |
$174.99 | ~$150 used | ~$150 used | ~$100 used |
It’s not a good look to have a new GPU competing against the three-year-old GTX 1650, but that’s effectively where things stand. Nvidia hasn’t really tried to launch a budget card in recent years, though there are plenty of indications that we’ll soon see a new GeForce GTX 1630. That seems silly, as we already have the GTX 1650, and Nvidia should just make more of those instead of cutting features even more to create a 1630, but I digress.
One item of business we need to discuss is the out-of-box experience with the RX 6400, specifically the card’s completely locked-down nature. Our understanding is that all overclocking options for the RX 6400 are disabled, and at least in AMD’s drivers as well as MSI Afterburner, there’s no ability to change any of the clocks or other elements. That probably means we won’t see factory overclocked cards, which isn’t the case for the other GPUs.
The RX 6400’s biggest selling points will be size and power requirements. It’s one of the few current options if you want a single-slot card that will fit into a slim form factor PC. Theoretically, you can put the RX 6400 into any PC that has a PCIe x16 slot, and it should work. However, we need to mention that performance will be lower with a PCIe 3.0 system, thanks to the x4 PCIe link width. (We measured about 8–10% lower performance on average when testing the RX 6500 XT with PCIe 3.0 vs. PCIe 4.0.)
Current graphics card prices are often hitting MSRPs, sometimes lower. For example, the RX 6400 can be purchased at AMD’s official $160 starting price, while the RX 6500 XT can be had for just $15 more — but it needs a 6-pin power connector. AMD’s older RX 5500 XT 4GB can only be found as a used option these days, and the same generally goes for the GTX 1650 Super and GTX 1650, though new cards can sometimes be had for $200. There were a few GTX 1650 cards that didn’t need a 6-pin adapter, but they’re hard to come by and tend to perform a bit worse than the typical 6-pin models.
- MORE: Best Graphics Cards
- MORE: GPU Benchmarks and Hierarchy
- MORE: All Graphics Content
- 1
Current page:
AMD Radeon RX 6400
Next Page PowerColor Radeon RX 6400 ITX
Jarred Walton is a senior editor at Tom’s Hardware focusing on everything GPU. He has been working as a tech journalist since 2004, writing for AnandTech, Maximum PC, and PC Gamer. From the first S3 Virge ‘3D decelerators’ to today’s GPUs, Jarred keeps up with all the latest graphics trends and is the one to ask about game performance.
Nvidia GeForce vs AMD Radeon GPUs in 2022 (Benchmarks & Comparison)
Most professionals lean towards Nvidia graphics cards whenever there’s work involved. Although many workstation applications still work better with Nvidia GPUs, AMD is slowly but surely catching up in this race.
One such (recent) example is Maxon finally announcing support for AMD Radeon Pro GPUs on Windows.
Until now, access to Maxon’s Redshift GPU render engine was limited to only Nvidia GPUs (unless you used a Mac and could deal with a Beta release).
With AMD showing that they’re finally ready to wrestle Nvidia for that performance crown, adoption is on the rise.
But is the professional market ready for them yet?
Honestly, I’m not sure. And ‘not being sure’ is something professionals, whose livelihoods depend on their workstations, can’t afford to risk.
Let’s dive a bit deeper and look into how these two GPU behemoths battle it out in 2022! If you’re here for a quick recommendation for some common workloads, here you go:
| Category/Task | No-Compromise Performance | CG Director Best Value |
Budget Recommendation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Video Editing / Encoding | RTX 3080 / RTX3090 Ti | RTX 3070 Ti | RTX 3060 Ti |
| Viewports & 3D Modeling | RTX 3080 Ti | RTX 3070 | RTX 3050 |
| GPU Rendering | RTX 3090* | RTX 3080 | RTX 3060 Ti |
| CAD / CAM | RTX 3090 | RTX 3070 | RTX 3060 |
*if you want to add multiple GPUs, 3080 is a better option
AMD Radeon vs.
Nvidia GeForce: A Quick History Recap
ATI vs. Nvidia vs. 3dfx: 3 Competitors, 1 Crown
Both AMD and Nvidia have been pushing the envelope when it comes to computing and graphics for years now.
I’d go far as saying that without the intense competition between ATI and Nvidia in those early years, we wouldn’t be where we are today.
But back then, both Nvidia and ATI had another competitor to contend with – 3dfx Interactive, based out of San Jose, California.
3dfx Interactive was a well-known name in those days because it pretty much pioneered modern 3D graphics processing units and the concept of video cards in the 90s.
Sadly, in the late 90s, things went sideways for the company. 3dfx just struggled to keep up with Nvidia and ATI’s performance crown-grabbing frenzy and eventually sold most of its assets to Nvidia in 2002; it filed for bankruptcy later that same year.
ATI Radeon and NVidia GeForce
While the Nvidia GeForce name popped up in 1999, ATI’s ‘Radeon’ brand didn’t show up until 2000 when ATI launched the Radeon DDR – ATI’s first fully DirectX 7 compliant graphics card.
Radeon DDR Graphics Card and GeForce 2 GTS (Yes, dinosaurs on graphics card boxes were a thing back then, and it was cool. No one can convince the teenager inside me otherwise.)
At the time, Nvidia had launched the second generation of GeForce GPUs – the GeForce 2 series.
This family of graphics cards offered several products like the GeForce 2 GTS, the GeForce 2 Pro, GeForce 2 Ultra, and the GeForce 2 Ti.
Quake 3 Arena Benchmark
Top-tier 2nd Gen Nvidia GPUs topped the charts, with the ATI Radeon DDR and the 3dfx Voodoo5 barely keeping up with even Nvidia’s first-generation GeForce 256 GPU.
This performance gap became somewhat of a tradition, with Nvidia managing to stay a step ahead of ATI when it came to top-tier performance – forcing the competition to cut profit margins and offer better value products to remain in the game.
AMD went on to acquire ATI in 2006 for a cool $5.4 billion. Although many financial analysts questioned the move at the time, AMD has gone on to leverage its Radeon arm quite well over the years.
AMD Radeon vs. Nvidia GeForce in the Late 2000s
Nvidia maintained a tight grasp on its performance crown for the longest time. Of course, this doesn’t mean that Radeon always played catch-up to Nvidia.
Let’s take a trip back to Jan 2009.
Nvidia had just introduced the GeForce GTX 200 series to take on AMD’s Radeon HD 4000 parts, which launched mid-2008.
Take a look at how they stacked up against each other!
Source: Tom’s Hardware
Radeon HD 4870X2 Benchmark summary
AMD’s commitment to winning the crown after Nvidia embarrassed its Radeon HD 3870 X2 with the legendary GeForce 9800 GTX is palpable with this generation.
The Radeon team did everything in its power to wrest back the crown from Nvidia, and it was successful (in a way)!
Source: Wikimedia Commons
Source: Guru3D
Not only did it completely eclipse every offering from Nvidia’s GeForce 9000 lineup, but its top performers also managed to go toe-to-toe even with Nvidia’s GeForce 200 series of GPUs that launched two quarters later.
However, AMD quickly lost the crown to Nvidia once more as the latter managed to eke out a slim victory with its GeForce GTX 295 in early 2009.
That said, many contended that Radeon’s approach of ‘gluing’ 2 GPUs onto a single board wasn’t as good as a single powerful GPU (with good reason).
GeForce GTX 295 Performance
On a sidenote – TechPowerUp’s GPU database is a boon to hardware nerds like me, and huge props to them for maintaining and updating it for so long!
AMD vs. Nvidia in the Workstation/Professional Market
Graphics processing has come a long way since the days of Voodoo cards. But the companies in the ring (for desktop PCs) remain nearly the same. Yes, AMD acquired ATI, but otherwise, there’s no change in competition.
Besides Radeon’s lean period, i.e., from 2014 (after the Radeon HD 7000 series) to around 2019 (until the launch of the RX 5000 series), AMD and Nvidia have generally managed to compete against each other pretty evenly in the gaming space.
However, AMD’s lean years were…LEAN. Here’s an interesting tidbit: AMD couldn’t beat the performance level of its own Radeon HD 7990 graphics card by much for over four years!
Radeon HD 7990 Performance
For reference, the Radeon HD 7990 was AMD’s top-of-the-line offering back in 2013. And the Radeon RX 590 was its best product until the launch of RX Vega in mid-2017!
A 15% uplift in graphics performance over 4 years is horrendous. It looks even worse when Nvidia was busy obliterating its own GPU records – offering a whopping 267% improvement in performance during that time frame.
Nvidia GTX 780 Performance
That said, the performance disparity was only one factor in the widespread adoption of Nvidia cards in professional apps.
Addressing the CUDA in the Room
CUDA, or Compute Unified Device Architecture, is a powerful proprietary API from Nvidia that lets developers effectively execute parallel tasks on Nvidia graphics chips.
It focuses on parallelizing operations and is perfect for tasks that can be broken down into smaller sub-tasks to be handled concurrently.
GPU rendering is one great example.
The attention Nvidia heaped on the professional space was instrumental in developing an ecosystem of CUDA-accelerated pro apps.
Unfortunately, AMD just got left behind during this time. Notes like this one from OctaneRender in many professional applications were quite prevalent –
Required CUDA Support for Octane Render GPU Engine
While Nvidia developed its proprietary CUDA platform, AMD chose to rely on OpenCL – an open framework for writing programs that can execute across any processing unit, including Central Processing Units, Graphics Processing Units, Field-Programmable Gate Arrays, etc.
However, AMD’s lackluster performance and some complications in developing for OpenCL meant that professional apps heavily favored CUDA rather than OpenCL.
So, Nvidia not only completely eclipsed Radeon GPUs in performance, but it also invested in encouraging an ecosystem of CUDA-accelerated pro applications.
This combination of a robust ecosystem and raw performance made Nvidia the GPU of choice for ANY professional task for over half a decade.
Sprinkle in Some Optix for Good Measure
Nvidia wasn’t done with just CUDA, though.
Optix is a proprietary framework from Nvidia that allows optimal ray tracing performance on any Nvidia graphics card. Think of it as a sibling to CUDA that aimed to accelerate ray tracing calculations, whereas CUDA was focused on compute.
By the way, did you know that Nvidia first launched Optix well over a decade ago? Well, they did – in 2009.
However, the GPUs at the time weren’t even particularly adept at rasterization (by modern standards), let alone being able to handle ray traced scenes effectively. Little did we know that it would take nearly a decade for it to happen.
(Here’s a link to the modern Nvidia Optix page if you want to find out more)
Then came Nvidia’s RTX Series (with its less cool full-form – Nvidia Ray Tracing Texel eXtreme) with dedicated Ray Tracing cores.
When they launched, the market scrambled to make sense of the new RTX graphics cards.
Gamers got busy figuring out whether a ray-traced game looked better than its regular counterpart. At the same time, professionals wondered whether this technology could help them work faster.
The answer to the first question in most cases is ‘sure, if you look close enough,’ but the answer to the second question turned out to be – ‘wow, definitely yes.’
Here’s an example of what I’m talking about (using Blender’s Cycles Renderer).
Blender 2.93 – Cycles OptiX Render Performance (Classroom) (June 2021)
While the RTX cards can leverage Nvidia’s Optix RT engine, that poor GTX 1080 Ti (a rendering powerhouse of its time) is left with only CUDA acceleration.
The difference? Well, the chart tells it best.
When you look at the CUDA render times, an RTX 3060 is no match for the GTX 1080 Ti.
However, add Optix into the equation, and suddenly the GeForce RTX 3060 now obliterates the once-mighty GTX 1080 Ti with nearly half the render time! You’ll find a similar story unfolding across the board when it comes to CUDA vs.
Optix here.
AMD Radeon vs. Nvidia GeForce in 2022
Even we at CGDirector, have always exclusively recommended Nvidia graphics cards for all GPU-heavy Pro workloads.
They offered the broadest application support, excellent performance, and relatively stable drivers – a trifecta for workstations.
Have things changed in 2022? Let’s look at a few benchmarks and find out!
Nvidia vs. AMD Benchmarks for GPU Rendering
Redshift
Redshift is one of the world’s most popular GPU render engines, and Maxon (the creators of Cinema 4D) recently acquired and brought it under their suite of creative apps.
Until last year, Redshift offered only CUDA support, which means it worked only with Nvidia GPUs.
Things changed this year due to a couple of reasons. One is Apple’s push for Radeon on the Mac platform; the second reason is just AMD’s performance uplift after years of lagging behind Nvidia.
Redshift GPU Rendering Performance on AMD GPUs
Yes, the AMD numbers look awful if you compare the performance between Nvidia and AMD on Redshift.
Redshift GPU Rendering Performance on Nvidia GPUs
However, before I dissect this, it’s important to note that the Radeon numbers are from early beta versions of C4D and Redshift on MacOS.
The performance is basically what you get now, but things might improve as drivers and applications add optimization for Radeon cards.
For now, let’s circle back to the performance here.
A single $350 (MSRP) RTX 3060 comes just 10 seconds behind a single $999 Radeon RX 6900 XT.
Sadly, it’s not even close, and it’s not worth going AMD if you depend on Redshift as your primary GPU renderer.
Verdict: Go Nvidia. AMD support isn’t great at the moment.
Indigo Renderer
Indigo Renderer defines itself as an ‘OpenCL-based GPU engine to offer industry-leading performance on Nvidia and AMD graphics cards.’
Since AMD relies on OpenCL, things should be quite a bit better for Team Red, right?
Indigo Render Benchmark Chart
Yes, it is (somewhat).
AMD manages to claw back some lost ground when using Indigo Renderer for GPU rendering, but its showing is far from impressive.
Nvidia completely obliterates the top-tier Radeon RX 6900 XT with its GeForce RTX 3090.
Even in the mainstream offerings from both companies, Nvidia offers the better product with its GeForce RTX 3080 outperforming a similarly-priced Radeon RX 6800 XT.
Verdict: Go Nvidia, but AMD isn’t bad.
Blender Classroom GPU Render (OpenCL / CUDA / Optix)
Before even looking at the results, I knew this one would be painful for AMD.
The Nvidia Optix Ray Tracing engine offers impressive performance in professional apps that leverage its ray tracing acceleration. Just looking at the mile-long laundry list of partners on their page should be clue enough:
Nvidia OptiX Partners
Blender’s Cycles Renderer can now leverage Optix when using RTX graphics cards – making it much faster than CUDA or OpenCL.
Now, with that out of the way, let’s see how Radeon (using OpenCL) fares against Nvidia (CUDA) in the famed Blender Classroom render using Cycles, shall we?
Blender 2.
93 – Cycles GPU Render Performance (Classroom) (June 2021)
AMD’s recent improvements have allowed it to catch up to Nvidia’s CUDA-accelerated performance.
But unfortunately, RT-acceleration has effectively halved render times, as you can see below:
Blender OptiX GPU Render Benchmark
Blender Classroom GPU Render Benchmark
Nvidia’s RTX 3000 lineup completely crushes Radeon when it comes to performance in GPU rendering using Cycles.
AMD’s showing here is so bad that the $400~ Nvidia RTX 3060 Ti easily beats an AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT! We’ve seen similar results with our tests, and several reviewers also report similar margins.
Let’s give AMD another shot, using its own Radeon ProRender for Blender.
AMD Radeon ProRender Performance – Blender Classroom Scene (June 2021)
Well, it doesn’t look too great either.
Even if we ignore that ProRender takes so much longer to complete the Classroom Render compared to Blender Cycles, Nvidia adds insult to injury by performing better than AMD.
An RTX 3080 still outpaces AMD’s best offering by a decent margin while costing less money.
Verdict: Go Nvidia. Radeon GPUs do work, but not well enough to recommend.
Nvidia vs. AMD Benchmarks for 3D Modeling
Autodesk Maya and Solidworks
Both Maya and Solidworks are well-known professional 3D modeling applications.
While Solidworks generally appeals to design professionals working on the engineering side of things, Maya is more popular among creative professionals.
Source: LinusTechTips Radeon RX 6800 Review
Performance for AMD in Maya and Solidworks isn’t too bad. Nonetheless, Nvidia manages to best AMD without too much trouble.
Since the GeForce RTX 3070 easily keeps up with the pricier Radeon RX 6800 XT, Nvidia remains the right choice for professionals using either Maya or Solidworks.
Note – Some features like Solidworks RealView are only available on supported workstation GPUs from either AMD or Nvidia.
So, you won’t be missing out on any significant feature regardless of whether you go with workstation graphics cards from Team Green or Team Red.
Verdict: Go with Nvidia. Although AMD cards perform well, Nvidia beats them in price to performance quite handily.
Workstation Benchmarks for Video Editing
DaVinci Resolve (PugetBench)
DaVinci Resolve might not have the reach or renown of Adobe’s Premiere Pro yet, but it has become pretty well-known in the industry these past few years. It also handles multiple GPUs and CPU cores quite efficiently.
Puget Systems pit AMD Radeon’s best against Nvidia’s RTX cards to see who comes out on top. Let’s see how it looks!
Pugetbench Davinci Resolve Benchmark Comparison – GPU
Pugetbench Davinci Resolve Benchmark Comparison – GPU Effects Score
Unfortunately, AMD’s woes don’t seem to end at GPU rendering.
Even the much cheaper Nvidia GeForce RTX 3060 Ti manages to embarrass the top Radeon card by a decent margin, while the RTX 3090 and RTX 3080 are in a league of their own.
If you’re working with DaVinci Resolve, Nvidia offers way better value.
Verdict: Go Nvidia. AMD cards work, but not well.
Adobe Premiere Pro 0.92 (PugetBench)
Premiere Pro is pretty much the industry standard for professional video editing. What’s more, it’s been around forever, with its first version launching way back in 2003.
Today, it is an integral part of the Adobe Creative Cloud license that boasts over 26 million paid subscribers.
Until recently, AMD cards performed quite poorly on Premiere Pro. But Adobe has pushed updates to better support Radeon GPUs over the past couple of years, improving performance.
Let’s see how AMD Radeon GPUs hold up compared to Nvidia’s RTX lineup in 2022!
Pugetbench Premiere Pro Benchmark Comparison – GPU Standard overall score
Pugetbench Premiere Pro Benchmark Comparison – GPU score
Although Radeon graphics cards fare slightly better in Premiere Pro (compared to DaVinci Resolve), Nvidia still manages to edge them out comfortably.
The much cheaper Nvidia RTX 3080 completely outclasses anything AMD offers, while the RTX 3060 Ti can easily match pricier competitors from the Radeon stable.
That said, do note that the Radeon RX 6800 XT and RX 6900 XT scores being so close to each other could potentially point to an optimization issue.
Verdict: Go Nvidia. But AMD isn’t completely horrible here.
Adobe After Effects (PugetBench)
It’s not too far-fetched to say that After Effects is the industry standard for motion graphics in 2.5D or pseudo-3D.
Although it’s known for chugging down all the system RAM you can throw at it, After Effects’ GPU requirements aren’t that demanding.
Here’s a benchmark from Puget Systems:
Pugetbench After Effects Benchmark Comparison – GPU overall score
The performance is so close to each other on any modern graphics card that you get a few comical results.
For example, the 8GB GeForce RTX 3070 outpaces a 10GB GeForce RTX 3080!
The dedicated GPU scores also tell a similar story:
Pugetbench After Effects Benchmark Comparison – GPU score
Things look quite a bit better for Team Red (finally) when competing against Nvidia for After Effects.
Admittedly, this could come down to After Effects being bottlenecked by something other than the GPU because most tasks on it aren’t too GPU-bound past a certain point.
For the most part, you can expect a similar experience with Radeon or GeForce RTX cards. However, Nvidia is still the way to go for professionals who want the best value and performance on the market right now.
Verdict: Go Nvidia or AMD. Both are similar, with Nvidia faring just a tiny touch better.
Nvidia or AMD: Which is the Best Choice for Workstations in 2022?
Although we’ve explored a variety of workloads, AMD doesn’t manage to offer value for those using Pro apps.
Granted, there are some exceptions (Indigo Renderer, for example), but it’s mostly just a train wreck of a showing for Team Red.
This is disappointing, not just for AMD, but for professionals as well. Competition in the market is always welcome, and we have become overly reliant on Nvidia to deliver the performance we need to get work done for a decade.
Don’t get me wrong, though. This isn’t a knock against Nvidia at all.
They’re designing and launching incredible products, and the performance uplift is more than welcome.
For better or worse, Nvidia continues to dominate AMD in the workstation space, and there’s just no way that we could recommend AMD outright for even a single workload we covered.
Over to You
So, what do you think about the GPU landscape in 2022? Let us know in the comments below! Or our forum!
CGDirector is Reader-supported. When you buy through our links, we may earn an affiliate commission.
AMD vs. Nvidia: An Epic Battle for the Heart of Your Gaming PC
AMD and Nvidia have fought for decades, but one company takes a clear lead.
By Matthew S. Smith
Updated: Sep 29, 2022 3:46 am
Posted: Sep 22, 2022 7:16 pm
It’s a war waged since the beginning of the 3D graphics on gaming PCs.
ATI and Nvidia went toe-to-toe through the 1990s and early 2000s. Nvidia won that fight, but ATI received a second chance when AMD acquired the company in 2006. The battle has continued since.
Choosing between AMD and Nvidia can seem confusing at a glance, but one has several key advantages over its competitor. Here’s how AMD and Nvidia compare.
We compare AMD vs. Nvidia with the following in mind:
- General Gaming Performance
- Ray Tracing Performance
- Gaming Laptop Performance
- Upscaling (FSR vs. DLSS)
- Adaptive Sync (FreeSync vs. G-Sync)
- Software & Drivers
- Price Comparison
- The Verdict
AMD vs. Nvidia – General Gaming Performance
Pitting AMD against Nvidia in general game performance is difficult because of the wide range of graphic cards available, but a few trends stand out.
The best video cards from AMD and Nvidia offer similar performance. AMD’s best cards are represented by the RX 6800 XT, RX 6900 XT, and RX 6950XT, while Nvidia’s best are found in the RTX 3080, RTX 3080 Ti, RTX 3090, and 3090 Ti.
All of these cards can handle 4K at 60 frames per second or higher in most PC games sold today.
IGN’s reviews of the Nvidia RTX 3090 Ti and AMD RX 6950 XT reached a score of 8/10. The same is true of other high-end AMD and Nvidia cards.
Mid-range performance is where the competition heats up. Nvidia’s cards also take the lead in this category with the RTX 3070 sitting at the top of IGN’s list of the best graphics cards. AMD alternatives like the RX 6700 XT fall slightly behind. The word “slight” is important, though. It’s hard to notice the difference without a framerate counter.
AMD has an edge in the entry-level market with its Radeon RX 6500 XT. Though not as quick as many hoped, the RX 6500 XT is available at or slightly below its $200 MSRP and can outrun the GTX 1650, which is similarly priced.
Nvidia fights back if you can spend a tad more, however, thanks to its bewildering array of budget cards. This includes the GTX 1650 Super, GTX 1660, GTX 1660 Ti, GTX 1660 Super, RTX 2060, and RTX 3050.
AMD makes do with older products, like the RX 5600 XT and Radeon RX 580. Though you might find a good deal on a particular budget AMD card, Nvidia’s offerings are more widely available and usually a better value.
This category is close, but Nvidia takes the win. It goes toe-to-toe with AMD on the high end, yet provides a better range of options through the budget and mid-range price points. AMD’s alternatives are spread too thin.
Winner: Nvidia
AMD vs. Nvidia – Ray tracing performance
Loading
Nvidia brought ray tracing to PC gaming with the launch of the RTX 20 series in 2018. AMD needed a few years to catch up, but the company delivered hardware ray tracing acceleration in the Radeon RX 6000 series.
This has worked in Nvidia’s favor. AMD’s best video cards, such as the Radeon RX 6950 XT, RX 6900 XT, and RX 6800XT, have ray tracing performance more in line with the less expensive Nvidia RTX 3070 and RTX 3070 Ti. Nvidia’s best video cards are up to 50% quicker than AMD hardware when ray tracing is on.
What about game compatibility? Thankfully, nearly all games that support ray tracing are compatible with both Nvidia and AMD hardware. This isn’t completely universal though. Godfall initially only supported AMD, though it has since received an update for Nvidia RTX support. Still, ray tracing exclusives are an exception to the rule.
Winner: Nvidia
AMD vs. Nvidia: Gaming laptop performance
The strengths that lead Nvidia to wins in both general and ray tracing performance are repeated in gaming laptops.
AMD and Nvidia both offer multiple laptop graphics solutions, and most compete closely with each other. However, Nvidia has a noticeable lead in the budget and thin-and-light market, where the GTX 1650 mobile and RTX 3050 are widely available. Laptops with AMD discrete graphics, like the HP Victus 16 and Asus ROG Zephyrus G14, are extremely rare.
There’s more competition in the mid-range gaming laptop market, but Nvidia remains the leader.
AMD’s RX 6700M and RX 6800M are quick but found in only a few laptops, such as the Asus ROG Strix G15.
The lack of AMD hardware leaves Nvidia to win this category by default. There’s literally hundreds of great gaming laptops with Nvidia hardware which, in turn, means you can shop based on price to snag a better deal.
Winner: Nvidia
AMD vs. Nvidia – Upscaling
Upscaling is demanding even on the world’s most powerful consumer video cards. AMD and Nvidia compensate with upscaling features that basically render games at a lower resolution and then upscale the result to your monitor’s native resolution.
AMD’s technology is called FidelityFX Super Resolution (FSR 2.0). It’s an open-source technology available to both AMD and Nvidia hardware as well as others, such as Intel. Its first incarnation was a spatial upscaler that could only use data from each frame. The new version, FSR 2.0, is a temporal upscaler, which means it can use data from multiple frames over time.
FSR 1.0 is available in over 100 games. FSR 2.0 is newer and only supported by a couple dozen games (so far).
Nvidia’s DLSS is more advanced. It uses machine learning to upscale a game beyond its render resolution. This technique is more capable because it adds new data to each frame. This is not open-source and only works on Nvidia hardware. Over 200 games and apps support DLSS.
This is a win for Nvidia, as the image quality of DLSS is often superior to FSR. DLSS is an excellent choice for gamers who want to experience ray tracing at high frame rates Also, DLSS and FSR are available in supported titles even when ray tracing is not turned on, which can be useful when performance is lower than you’d hope. DLSS is again better in this situation due to it’s superior image quality. More often you can run DLSS more aggressively and retain image quality than FSR.
With that said, a large majority of games don’t support FSR or DLSS, while others support one but not the other.
The importance of each will depend on the games you play.
Winner: Nvidia
AMD vs. Nvidia – Adaptive sync
Adaptive Sync is one of the most important features of modern video cards, laptop graphics, and PC gaming displays. It allows a gaming monitors and gaming TVs to refresh in sync with the output of a your graphics card. This keeps motion smooth and stops screen-tearing. AMD FreeSync and Nvidia G-Sync offer adaptive sync when paired with a compatible display.
The two standards are more similar than they are different. All versions of AMD FreeSync, and Nvidia’s “G-Sync Compatible” version of G-Sync, are built on VESA’s open AdaptiveSync standard. In fact, most monitors that are compatible with one will work with the other – though this isn’t guaranteed unless support is advertised.
Nvidia’s G-Sync and G-Sync Ultimate are a different story. These versions of G-Sync communicate with G-Sync hardware in compatible displays. This enables adaptive sync over a wider range of refresh rates, but G-Sync and G-Sync Ultimate displays only support adaptive sync with Nvidia video cards.
AMD and Nvidia fail to take a lead here. Nvidia’s G-Sync and G-Sync Ultimate are technically superior, but only just. G-Sync and G-Sync Ultimate displays are also rare and expensive. Most gaming monitors sold today stick to AMD FreeSync, Nvidia G-Sync Compatible, or both.
Winner: Tie
Software & Drivers
AMD and Nvidia provide a variety of software features beyond support for scaling and high refresh rates.
AMD’s features include Radeon Chill, a mode which is meant to reduce fan noise and system temperatures, Radeon Image Sharpening, a filter meant to improve sharpness in games, and AMD Integer Scaling, which can help with presentation of older, retro titles.
Nvidia, meanwhile, offers Nvidia Ansel, a special screenshot mode available in specific games, ShadowPlay for recording games or to assist with streaming, and Nvidia FreeStyle, which can be used to add filters over games for a different look.
AMD and Nvidia also provide overclocking through AMD Performance Tuning and Nvidia GeForce Experience.
They’re similar in function, AMD’s app is easier to use. This isn’t a major advantage, however, because third-party overclocking software is available for both AMD and Nvidia hardware.
These added features may appeal in certain situations, but they’re not something most gamers will use every day, or even every month.
Winner: Tie
Price Comparison
Comparing video card pricing is a bit tricky, as most video cards don’t currently sell at MSRP. Pricing has improved in recent months, however. Some cards are now sold near, or even below, MSRP.
Entry-level video cards start at the AMD Radeon 6500XT ($169) and the Nvidia GTX 1650 ($189). These cards aren’t quick, however, so most gamers will want to step up one or two tiers. AMD’s budget options include the Radeon 6600 ($249) and the Radeon 6600 XT ($343). Nvidia competes with the RTX 3050 ($324) and the RTX 3060 ($420).
Nvidia fans, be warned: some entry-level RTX models, like the RTX 3060, remain in limited supply and are extremely expensive for their performance.
They’re a bad value at current prices.
Gamers looking for a mid-range option will need to consider options starting near $500. AMD’s cards include the Radeon 6700XT ($399), Radeon 6750XT ($429), and Radeon 6800 ($519), while Nvidia offers the RTX 3060 Ti ($492), RTX 3070 ($574), and RTX 3070 Ti ($629).
The RTX 3070 is the value leader in this category, as it’s powerful enough to handle high resolutions and ray tracing, especially with DLSS turned on. However, AMD’s cards hold up well in games that don’t offer ray tracing.
AMD’s high-end video cards include the Radeon 6800XT ($599), Radeon 6900XT ($679), and Radeon 6950XT ($1,999), while Nvidia offers the RTX 3080 ($781), RTX 3080 Ti ($869), RTX 3090 ($1,100), and RTX 3090 Ti ($1,129).
The RTX 3080 is a great pick in this category if you want to use ray tracing, while the Radeon 6800XT is better if you don’t plan to play games with ray tracing.
Both cards deliver most of the performance of more expensive models at an attractive price.
However, it might be wise to hold off on buying any high-end card until AMD announces next-gen hardware to challenge Nvidia’s newly introduced RTX 4090 and RTX 4080.
Winner: Nvidia
AMD vs. Nvidia – The Verdict
I’ll be blunt: Nvidia beats AMD, and it’s not even close.
This isn’t to say AMD is hopeless. AMD graphics can do well in general performance tests, especially below 4K resolution, and a variety of AMD cards can provide excellent bang for your buck.
Nvidia takes a big lead in ray tracing, however, and has a superior upscaling solution in the form of DLSS, which makes ray tracing playable on a wide range of Nvidia hardware. Nvidia also dominates the gaming laptop arena.
This conclusion isn’t a shock. The latest Steam Hardware Survey shows over 75% of all players on Steam use Nvidia hardware. AMD is in a distant second with a hair under 15% of the Steam user base.
That’s a massive gap – and further proof Nvidia holds the crown.
If you buy something through this post, IGN may get a share of the sale. For more, learn more.
Nvidia vs. AMD: Fierce Competition, But One Clear Winner
If you want the best graphics card for your gaming PC, there are only two options: Nvidia and AMD. Although their rivalry dates back decades — back before AMD bought ATI for its graphics division — they’re still battling it out in 2021. And the competition has never been more fierce.
Contents
- Nvidia vs. AMD in 2021
- Pricing and availability
- Performance
- Ray tracing and upscaling
- Software and drivers
- Mobile GPUs
- Performance parity, feature leader (Nvidia wins)
We’re here to break down all of the differences between Nvidia and AMD, how each of their graphics cards perform, and what you can expect to pay. There are a lot of differences between Team Green and Team Red, and they both make excellent graphics cards.
Based on our testing and experience, though, there’s one clear winner.
Nvidia vs. AMD in 2021
Before getting to the specifics, let’s set the stage. Nvidia and AMD released new GPU generations in 2020, and they’re expected to release new generations in 2022. Nvidia is currently selling its RTX 30-series graphics cards, and AMD is selling its RX 6000 graphics cards. Next year, we should see RTX 40-series and RX 7000 GPUs.
Here are the most recent desktop graphics cards Nvidia is selling, ranked by raw power with the RTX 3090 being the most powerful:
- RTX 3090
- RTX 3080 Ti
- RTX 3080
- RTX 3070 Ti
- RTX 3070
- RTX 3060 Ti
- RTX 3060
AMD has a similar lineup of desktop graphics cards available. Here are the most recent AMD graphics cards, also ranked by raw power:
- RX 6900 XT
- RX 6800 XT
- RX 6800
- RX 6700 XT
- RX 6600 XT
- RX 6600
Although we ranked the cards based on raw power, that doesn’t mean you should gun for the top card from each range.
The RTX 3090, for example, is the most powerful card out of Nvidia’s lineup on paper. However, a lot of that power shows through in professional creative workloads, such as 3D modeling and rendering. Similarly, the RX 6900 XT is the fastest card from AMD’s lineup, but the RX 6800 XT is nearly as good when it comes to gaming.
These are the most recent cards from AMD and Nvidia, but you shouldn’t discount previous generations. Right now, we recommend sticking with either current-gen or last-gen parts. We’ll explain why throughout this comparison, but the short of it is that the last two generations of AMD cards have been much better than the generations before, and the last two generations of Nvidia cards have access to some critical gaming features.
Pricing and availability
AMD
For years, AMD has been the best option for PC builders on a budget. In 2021, however, Nvidia and AMD are closely matched when it comes to pricing, and AMD is even a little more expensive in some cases.
Starting with Nvidia, the cheapest RTX 3060 has a list price of $329 and the most expensive RTX 3090 has a list price of $1,499. AMD’s cheapest card, the RX 6600, also has a list price of $329, but its most expensive RX 6900 XT only lists for $999. Across the range, you’re looking at a $50 difference at most for comparable cards outside of the RX 6900 XT. The RTX 3070, for example, is $20 more expensive than the RX 6700 XT.
Unfortunately, list prices mean nothing in 2021. The GPU shortage has skyrocketed the price of graphics cards on the secondhand market, and a slew of tariffs and supply chain issues have led to increased prices at retailers. Almost universally, cards are selling for twice their list price, even at retailers.
A cryptocurrency miner attached to a laptop Getty Images
There are a few notable exceptions. The RX 6900 XT is only selling for $500 more than its list price, and it’s one of the most readily available cards at retailers. The RX 6600 and RX 6600 XT are near list price, too, though many third-party models released with a price of $100 or more than what AMD set.
Across the board, AMD cards are cheaper and have better availability. We’ve tracked the GPU market for over a year now, and AMD cards are the ones that come back in stock before Nvidia ones. AMD cards sell for about $100 less than their Nvidia counterparts on the secondhand market, though that largely comes down to what seller you can find.
In the overpriced GPU market of 2021, nobody wins. We recommend picking based on performance and features before seeking out the best deal on the card you want.
Performance
Nvidia has been the market leader in GPU performance for years, but AMD has made up a lot of ground. Although Nvidia graphics cards are better performers overall, the margins are much thinner than they used to be. And in some cases, AMD cards actually shoot ahead of the Nvidia competition.
The RX 6600, RTX 3060, and RX 6600 XT are the cheapest cards available, and they all target 1080p gaming. At 1080p with the graphics settings turned up, we found that the RX 6600 trails the RTX 3060 by about 7% across our suite of benchmarks.
The RX 6600 only managed to outclass the RTX 3060 in one game — Assassin’s Creed Valhalla.
| AMD RX 6600 | AMD RX 6600 XT | Nvidia RTX 3060 | |
| 3DMark Time Spy (GPU score) | 8,071 | 9,644 | 8,629 |
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 59 fps | 68 fps | 65 fps |
| Fortnite | 98 fps | 137 fps | 132 fps |
| Assassin’s Creed Valhalla | 71 fps | 83 fps | 64 fps |
| Battlefield V | 120 fps | 139 fps | 123 fps |
| Civilization VI | 138 fps | 161 fps | 143 fps |
For the RX 6600 XT, it managed to beat the RX 6600 and RTX 3060 by a wide margin, with up to a 16% gap between it and its non-XT counterpart.
The RX 6600 XT encroaches on the territory of the RTX 3060 Ti in terms of price, though. In that comparison, the RTX 3060 Ti is the clear winner. It’s the best 1080p graphics card based on our testing.
At list price, the RTX 3060 Ti is surprisingly close to the RX 6700 XT for almost $100 less. It’s still behind, but not by much. The RX 6700 XT and RTX 3070 target 1440p, and they’re both capable cards at that resolution. Once again, our testing showed that AMD’s offering is about 10% behind, with some games, such as Assassin’s Creed Valhalla, favoring the AMD GPU.
| Nvidia RTX 3070 Ti | Nvidia RTX 3080 | AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT | |
| 3DMark Time Spy | 13893 | 16108 | 11726 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike | 26516 | 28460 | 26830 |
| Assassin’s Creed Valhalla | 50 | 52 | 42 |
| Battlefield V | 80 | 100 | 69 |
| Fortnite | 70 | 95 | 58 |
| Civilization VI | 139 | 158 | 115 |
Past these cards, we get into 4K territory, and things start to get strange.
The RTX 3070 Ti just barely pushes over the 4K line, but the RTX 3080 beats it by a wide 14% margin overall. Based on our testing, the RTX 3080 is the best entry point to 4K gaming assuming you can find one at a reasonable price.
AMD’s competing RX 6800 and RX 6800 XT are close to the RTX 3080. Based on third-party testing, the RX 6800 XT is within a few frames of the RTX 3080 with ray tracing turned off. The RX 6800, meanwhile, delivers performance just ahead of the RTX 3070 Ti. Unlike the low-end cards, the RX 6800 XT and RTX 3080 are evenly matched as long as you don’t factor in ray tracing.
You really shouldn’t go above either the RX 6800 XT or RTX 3080 for gaming. The RTX 3080 Ti shows about a 9% advantage over the RTX 3080, but at $500 more. The RX 6900 XT and RTX 3090, meanwhile, are the best of the best. But as is the case with all top-of-the-line parts, they show diminishing returns.
| Nvidia RTX 3080 Ti | Nvidia RTX 3080 | AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT | |
| 3DMark Time Spy | 17634 | 16108 | 17340 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike | 30951 | 28460 | 38911 |
| Assassin’s Creed Valhalla | 56 | 52 | 69 |
| Battlefield V | 104 | 100 | 106 |
| Fortnite | 95 | 93 | 99 |
| Civilization VI | 177 | 158 | 184 |
Take the RX 6900 XT as an example.
It’s $200 less than the RTX 3080 Ti, but it should perform on the level of the RTX 3090. Based on our testing, it offers a minor uplift over the RTX 3080 Ti across games, though not enough to make a difference.
That leaves the RTX 3090, which is pointless for gaming. The RTX 3080 Ti is almost identical in terms of specs, and the RTX 3090 only performs about 3% above in most games. The RTX 3090 is a creative workhorse, shining with its 24GB of video memory in 3D modeling and rendering applications.
Overall, AMD cards trail their Nvidia counterparts at each price point, with the gap shrinking from about 10% on the low-end cards to a few percentage points on the high-end ones. It’s important to keep in mind price, though. Performance is always relative, and you can’t separate price from that. AMD cards sell for less on the secondhand market, so don’t discount Team Red. RX 6000 cards are excellent performers.
Ray tracing and upscaling
If you’re interested in ray tracing and upscaling, you can throw all of the performance numbers above out the window.
Simply put, Nvidia is the only option when it comes to ray tracing and upscaling. AMD offers hardware-accelerated ray tracing and its own upscaling feature, but they don’t come close to the competition from Nvidia.
During our testing of ray tracing games like Cyberpunk 2077 and Control, we found the same results time and again. AMD cards can’t handle ray tracing like Nvidia cards can. That comes down to a fundamental difference in the two companies approach GPU design.
Nvidia RTX 30-series GPUs include dedicated ray tracing cores. These cores handle ray tracing and they’re separate from the GPU cores. AMD, on the other hand, packs a ray accelerator into each compute unit. AMD cards still have hardware-accelerated ray tracing, but the cores that handle ray tracing don’t have nearly as much power behind them.
The big reason Nvidia has an advantage, though, is Deep Learning Super Sampling (DLSS). Ray tracing is demanding, and although Nvidia cards are better set up for it, you can still expect your frame rate to tank with ray tracing turned on.
Enter DLSS, which uses A.I. to upscale games and improve performance.
Based on our testing of DLSS, it can over a 100% improvement in supported games. DLSS takes advantage of Tensor cores on RTX 30-series and 20-series graphics cards. The Tensor cores basically run an A.I. model that has been trained on high-quality scans of a game, so it can reconstruct the image with shocking accuracy in real time.
AMD has an upscaling feature, too: FidelityFX Super Resolution (FSR). Unlike DLSS, FSR works across all graphics cards — Nvidia and AMD alike. That’s because it doesn’t leverage any dedicated hardware and it doesn’t use A.I. to upscale the image. FSR is based on an older spatial upscaling algorithm that AMD tweaked.
DLSS and FSR aren’t the same thing, even if they drive toward the same goal. FSR offers a larger uplift in performance, as you can see in our FidelityFX Super Resolution review, but at a significant cost to image quality. DLSS still provides a large increase while looking much closer to native resolution.
In the context of ray tracing, upscaling is essential. It’s still too demanding for modern hardware to run, so you need to turn on either DLSS or FSR to get the best performance and image quality. DLSS is the better option out of the two, and it’s often included alongside ray tracing. It’s just a shame that DLSS is restricted to the last two generations of Nvidia graphics cards.
Software and drivers
There isn’t much of a comparison between AMD and Nvidia when it comes to driver support. We’ve seen issues with both when it comes to driver releases in the past, and both are quick to solve those issues when they come up. AMD and Nvidia also frequently release drivers alongside new games releases. Single out a single game or single driver release, and you’ll find a winner. Overall, AMD and Nvidia are evenly matched in driver quality and support.
They aren’t evenly matched in software, though. Nvidia offers GeForce Experience for its graphics cards, but it’s more of an overlay than anything else.
The app allows you to apply optimized settings to supported games, which Nvidia dials in based on the graphics card you have. Otherwise, the app is just a way to turn on the in-game overlay.
The overlay allows you to do all sorts of things, including streaming to Twitch, capturing gameplay, and displaying performance numbers on your screen. You can also apply photo mode to any game with Nvidia Ansel, as well as dial in an overclock with the built-in performance tweaker.
For most, the instant replay and highlights features are the ones that stand out. Instant replay allows you to capture up to 20 minutes of past gameplay footage, and highlights automatically capture moments when you achieve certain conditions in supported games (say, a medal in Destiny 2). All of these capture methods use Nvidia Shadowplay, which supports screenshots and videos at up to 8K.
AMD has Radeon Software, which comes with a much more robust list of features. It has almost too many to list.
Like GeForce Experience, you have access to instant replay, screenshot and video capture, performance monitoring, and graphical settings for supported games. You can also stream with Radeon Software, as well as apply an overclock to your GPU.
Radeon Software has a few extra goodies, though. Integer Scaling, for example, upscales retro games to work on modern displays, and AMD Link allows you or your friends to connect to your PC remotely on almost any device. All of AMD’s gaming features — FreeSync, Radeon Chill, and Radeon Anti-Lag, to name a few — are accessible through Radeon Software as well.
That’s the biggest difference between the two. Radeon Software gives you a window while GeForce Experience gives you an overlay. On its own, GeForce Experience does very little. You need to use the overlay, and that’s a problem when the overlay is prone to fail while playing games. On top of that, some Nvidia features are restricted to the Nvidia Control Panel, which is a separate piece of software that’s in desperate need of a facelift.
The two pieces of software are evenly matched on features, with a slight edge to GeForce Experience thanks to Ansel. Radeon Software is easier to use, however, and it includes more quality of life improvements.
Mobile GPUs
Along with desktop graphics cards, Nvidia and AMD have mobile GPUs. But you’ll find a lot more laptops with Nvidia graphics cards. Similar to Intel vs. AMD, Nvidia has a much larger stake in the mobile market, and you’ll generally find laptops with an Nvidia graphics card and Intel processor.
It’s difficult to draw any firm conclusions about how AMD and Nvidia mobile GPUs perform compared to each other. For example, the RX 6800M inside the Asus ROG Strix G15 outperforms the RTX 3080 inside the MSI GS66 Stealth. The MSI laptop doesn’t feature a fully powered RTX 3080, though, and it doesn’t have as robust of a cooling solution. So, is AMD better for mobile graphics cards? It’s a little more complicated than raw performance.
Mobile graphics cards don’t match their desktop counterparts, and laptop designers are free to choose how much power the cards get.
The RTX 3080 inside the MSI GS66 Stealth, for example, tops out at 95W. The RTX 3080 inside the Razer Blade 15 can draw up to 105W of power, and it unsurprisingly performs better. Add on top of that different cooling solutions, and the comparison isn’t so straightforward.
When it comes to mobile GPUs, individual laptop reviews are a must. There are absolutely differences between graphics cards — the RX 6800M will perform better than the RX 6700M, and so on. But when it comes to two comparable graphics cards, the laptop design plays a much more significant role in performance than if you went with an AMD or Nvidia GPU.
Keep in mind DLSS and ray tracing, though. Nvidia mobile GPUs still have access to these features, and our conclusions on the desktop cards apply here.
Performance parity, feature leader (Nvidia wins)
AMD has tried to reach performance parity with Nvidia for years. And RX 6000 graphics cards hit that mark, sometimes even exceeding it. That puts the focus on pricing and features.
For pricing, AMD graphics cards are selling for less than their Nvidia counterparts. Factor in ray tracing and DLSS, though, and that extra price is justified.
That doesn’t mean AMD is a bad option. In 2021, AMD is a better option than it has been in years. That said, it’s hard to recommend AMD over Nvidia simply because cards from both brands are overpriced in 2021. Maybe that changes when prices settle down, but for now, Nvidia is the winner.
Editors’ Recommendations
-
The best desktop computers for 2022: Dell, HP, Apple, and more
-
The best motherboards for Ryzen 7000 available right now
-
Lenovo leaks the world’s first gaming Chromebook — but there’s a catch
-
The best Mac games for 2022
-
The best mouse for Mac 2022
Difference Between Nvidia GeForce GTX and AMD Radeon [Updated 2022]
Last Updated : Sep 4, 2022 / By Sandeep Bhandari
/ Fact Checked / 5 mins
Nvidia GeForce GTX and AMD Radeon are both a series of graphics cards or GPUs (Graphics Processing Unit) used for gaming.
They are both well-known brands in the gaming industry and work quite smoothly in accelerating video graphics.
Despite having some similarities, GeForce GTX and AMD Radeon differ from each other in many ways.
Nvidia GeForce GTX vs AMD Radeon
The main difference between Nvidia GeForce GTX and AMD Radeon is that Nvidia GeForce GTX uses a G-SYNC monitor, whereas AMD Radeon uses a FreeSync monitor. These monitors help to synchronize the refresh rate of the display.
Nvidia GeForce GTX is a graphics card or GPU that is used for gaming purposes. This graphics card is quite well-known amongst gamers and is an in-demand product.
Nvidia GeForce GTX is more costly and high priced, as it uses premium and high-priced monitors and products. Thus, Nvidia GeForce GTX is less accessible to customers.
AMD Radeon is a graphics card or GPU that has been designed for gaming purposes. This graphics card is quite well-known and in-demand amongst gamers as well as pro-gamers.
AMD Radeon is cheaper compared to the Nvidia GeForce GTX as it uses a cheaper priced monitor and cheaper priced products than the former. Thus, AMD Radeon cards are more accessible to customers than GeForce GTX.
Comparison Table Between Nvidia GeForce GTX and AMD Radeon
| Parameters of Comparison | Nvidia GeForce GTX | AMD Radeon |
| Monitor | Nvidia GeForce GTX uses a G-SYNC monitor. | AMD Radeon uses a FreeSync monitor. |
| Price | Nvidia GeForce GTX is more costly than AMD Radeon. | AMD Radeon is cheaper compared to Nvidia GeForce GTX. |
| Performance | Nvidia GeForce GTX has a better and more high-end performance than AMD Radeon. |
AMD Radeon is not as good in performance and does not produce a good high-end performance like GeForce GTX. |
| GPU Processor | Nvidia GeForce GTX uses a CUDA processor. | AMD Radeon uses DirectCompute and OpenCL processors. |
| Accessible | Less accessible compared to AMD Radeon. | More accessible. |
| Gaming experience | Provides a smooth gaming experience. | Provides a boost in gaming. |
What is Nvidia GeForce GTX?
Nvidia GeForce GTX is a graphics card used for gaming purposes. Nvidia GeForce GTX uses the G-SYNC monitor that is of premium quality and price. Thus, Nvidia GeForce GTX is more costly and high-end than AMD Radeon as it uses a premium monitor.
Nvidia GeForce GTX uses the CUDA processor that is one of the best in the market.
Nvidia GeForce GTX has more memory speed than AMD Radeon. GeForce is a Game ready Driver that gives the best gaming performance from the time it is put into use.
Nvidia GeForce GTX provides a smooth gaming experience and helps remove jagged lines in the games. It has a better and more high-end performance than AMD Radeon. However, it is costlier and less accessible to customers than AMD Radeon because of its high price.
What is AMD Radeon?
AMD Radeon is a graphics card or GPU that has been designed for gaming purposes. AMD Radeon uses the FreeSync monitor that is cheaper compared to the G-SYNC monitor.
Thus, AMD Radeon is less costly than Nvidia GeForce GTX as it uses a cheaper priced monitor compared to Nvidia GeForce GTX that uses a premium and costly monitor.
AMD Radeon has lesser memory speed than Nvidia GeForce GTX. AMD Radeon relies mainly on DirectCompute and OpenCL. These processors are not as good as the CUDA processor used by Nvidia GeForce GTX.
AMD Radeon can also provide a smooth gaming experience. However, the experience will not be as good as the experience provided by Nvidia GeForce GTX.
AMD Radeon is not as good in performance as GeForce GTX because AMD has not produced good high-end cards like GeForce GTX. However, AMD Radeon cards are more accessible to customers than GeForce GTX because of their cheap price.
Main Differences Between Nvidia GeForce GTX and AMD Radeon
- Nvidia GeForce GTX uses the G-SYNC monitor that is of premium quality and price. On the other hand, AMD Radeon uses the FreeSync monitor that is cheaper compared to the G-SYNC monitor.
- Nvidia GeForce GTX uses the CUDA processor that is one of the best in the market, whereas, AMD Radeon relies mainly on DirectCompute and OpenCL.
- Nvidia GeForce GTX has more memory speed than AMD Radeon, whereas AMD Radeon has lesser memory speed than Nvidia GeForce GTX.
- Nvidia GeForce GTX is better and more high-end in performance than AMD Radeon, whereas AMD Radeon is not as good in performance as GeForce GTX because AMD has not produced good high-end cards like GeForce GTX.
- Nvidia GeForce GTX is more costly than AMD Radeon. On the other hand, AMD Radeon is cheaper compared to Nvidia GeForce GTX.
- Nvidia GeForce GTX is less accessible to consumers, whereas AMD Radeon is cheaper and more accessible to consumers.
Conclusion
Nvidia GeForce GTX and AMD Radeon are both a series of graphics cards or GPUs (Graphics Processing Unit) used for gaming. Despite having some similarities, GeForce GTX and AMD Radeon differ from each other in many ways.
Nvidia GeForce GTX uses the G-SYNC monitor that is of premium quality and price, and it has more memory speed than AMD Radeon. Nvidia GeForce GTX uses the CUDA processor that is one of the best in the market.
Nvidia GeForce GTX is better and more high-end in performance than AMD Radeon. Nvidia GeForce GTX is known for providing a smooth gaming experience. It is costlier and less accessible to customers than AMD Radeon.
AMD Radeon uses the FreeSync monitor that is cheaper compared to the G-SYNC monitor, and it has lesser memory speed than Nvidia GeForce GTX.
AMD Radeon relies mainly on DirectCompute and OpenCL.
It is not as good in performance as GeForce GTX. AMD Radeon also provides a boost in every gaming experience. It is cheaper and more accessible to customers than GeForce GTX.
The main difference between Nvidia GeForce GTX and AMD Radeon is that Nvidia GeForce GTX and AMD Radeon use a different monitors.
References
- https://academic.oup.com/bioinformatics/article/27/9/1309/242464?login=true
- https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/7476485/
Search for «Ask Any Difference» on Google. Rate this post!
[Total: 0]
One request?
I’ve put so much effort writing this blog post to provide value to you. It’ll be very helpful for me, if you consider sharing it on social media or with your friends/family. SHARING IS ♥️
Table of Contents
report this ad
0009
192-bit gddr5 9000 9000
2GeForce RTX 3060GeForce RTX 3050GeForce RTX 2080 TiGeForce RTX 2080 SuperGeForce RTX 2080GeForce RTX 2070 SuperGeForce RTX 2070GeForce RTX 2060 SuperGeForce RTX 2060GeForce GTX 1660 TiGeForce GTX 1660 SuperGeForce GTX 1660GeForce GTX 1650 SuperGeForce GTX 1650 GDDR6GeForce GTX 1650 rev.3GeForce GTX 1650 rev.2GeForce GTX 1650GeForce GTX 1630GeForce GTX 1080 TiGeForce GTX 1080GeForce GTX 1070 TiGeForce GTX 1070GeForce GTX 1060GeForce GTX 1060 3GBGeForce GTX 1050 TiGeForce GTX 1050 3GBGeForce GTX 1050GeForce GT 1030GeForce GTX Titan XGeForce GTX 980 TiGeForce GTX 980GeForce GTX 970GeForce GTX 960GeForce GTX 950GeForce GTX TitanGeForce GTX 780 TiGeForce GTX 780GeForce GTX 770GeForce GTX 760GeForce GTX 750 TiGeForce GTX 750GeForce GT 740GeForce GT 730GeForce GTX 690GeForce GTX 680GeForce GTX 670GeForce GTX 660 TiGeForce GTX 660GeForce GTX 650 Ti BoostGeForce GTX 650 TiGeForce GTX 650GeForce GT 640 rev.2GeForce GT 640GeForce GT 630 rev.2GeForce GT 630GeForce GTX 590GeForce GTX 580GeForce GTX 570GeForce GTX 560 TiGeForce GTX 560GeForce GTX 550 TiGeForce GT 520GeForce GTX 480GeForce GTX 470GeForce GTX 465GeForce GTX 460 SEGeForce GTX 460 1024MBGeForce GTX 460 768MBGeForce GTS 450GeForce GT 440 GDDR5GeForce GT 440 GDDR3GeForce GT 430GeForce GT 420GeForce GTX 295GeForce GTX 285GeForce GTX 280GeForce GTX 275GeForce GTX 260 rev.
2GeForce GTX 260GeForce GTS 250GeForce GTS 240GeForce GT 240GeForce GT 230GeForce GT 220GeForce 210Geforce 205GeForce GTS 150GeForce GT 130GeForce GT 120GeForce G100GeForce 9800 GTX+GeForce 9800 GTXGeForce 9800 GTSGeForce 9800 GTGeForce 9800 GX2GeForce 9600 GTGeForce 9600 GSO (G94)GeForce 9600 GSOGeForce 9500 GTGeForce 9500 GSGeForce 9400 GTGeForce 9400GeForce 9300GeForce 8800 ULTRAGeForce 8800 GTXGeForce 8800 GTS Rev2GeForce 8800 GTSGeForce 8800 GTGeForce 8800 GS 768MBGeForce 8800 GS 384MBGeForce 8600 GTSGeForce 8600 GTGeForce 8600 GSGeForce 8500 GT DDR3GeForce 8500 GT DDR2GeForce 8400 GSGeForce 8300GeForce 8200GeForce 8100GeForce 7950 GX2GeForce 7950 GTGeForce 7900 GTXGeForce 7900 GTOGeForce 7900 GTGeForce 7900 GSGeForce 7800 GTX 512MBGeForce 7800 GTXGeForce 7800 GTGeForce 7800 GS AGPGeForce 7800 GSGeForce 7600 GT Rev.2GeForce 7600 GTGeForce 7600 GS 256MBGeForce 7600 GS 512MBGeForce 7300 GT Ver2GeForce 7300 GTGeForce 7300 GSGeForce 7300 LEGeForce 7300 SEGeForce 7200 GSGeForce 7100 GS TC 128 (512)GeForce 6800 Ultra 512MBGeForce 6800 UltraGeForce 6800 GT 256MBGeForce 6800 GT 128MBGeForce 6800 GTOGeForce 6800 256MB PCI-EGeForce 6800 128MB PCI-EGeForce 6800 LE PCI-EGeForce 6800 256MB AGPGeForce 6800 128MB AGPGeForce 6800 LE AGPGeForce 6800 GS AGPGeForce 6800 GS PCI-EGeForce 6800 XTGeForce 6600 GT PCI-EGeForce 6600 GT AGPGeForce 6600 DDR2GeForce 6600 PCI-EGeForce 6600 AGPGeForce 6600 LEGeForce 6200 NV43VGeForce 6200GeForce 6200 NV43AGeForce 6500GeForce 6200 TC 64(256)GeForce 6200 TC 32(128)GeForce 6200 TC 16(128)GeForce PCX5950GeForce PCX 5900GeForce PCX 5750GeForce PCX 5550GeForce PCX 5300GeForce PCX 4300GeForce FX 5950 UltraGeForce FX 5900 UltraGeForce FX 5900GeForce FX 5900 ZTGeForce FX 5900 XTGeForce FX 5800 UltraGeForce FX 5800GeForce FX 5700 Ultra /DDR-3GeForce FX 5700 Ultra /DDR-2GeForce FX 5700GeForce FX 5700 LEGeForce FX 5600 Ultra (rev.
2)GeForce FX 5600 Ultra (rev.1)GeForce FX 5600 XTGeForce FX 5600GeForce FX 5500GeForce FX 5200 UltraGeForce FX 5200GeForce FX 5200 SEGeForce 4 Ti 4800GeForce 4 Ti 4800-SEGeForce 4 Ti 4200-8xGeForce 4 Ti 4600GeForce 4 Ti 4400GeForce 4 Ti 4200GeForce 4 MX 4000GeForce 4 MX 440-8x / 480GeForce 4 MX 460GeForce 4 MX 440GeForce 4 MX 440-SEGeForce 4 MX 420GeForce 3 Ti500GeForce 3 Ti200GeForce 3GeForce 2 Ti VXGeForce 2 TitaniumGeForce 2 UltraGeForce 2 PROGeForce 2 GTSGeForce 2 MX 400GeForce 2 MX 200GeForce 2 MXGeForce 256 DDRGeForce 256Riva TNT 2 UltraRiva TNT 2 PRORiva TNT 2Riva TNT 2 M64Riva TNT 2 Vanta LTRiva TNT 2 VantaRiva TNTRiva 128 ZXRiva 128 9Fury XRadeon R9 FuryRadeon R9 NanoRadeon R9 390XRadeon R9 390Radeon R9 380XRadeon R9 380Radeon R7 370Radeon R7 360Radeon R9 295X2Radeon R9 290XRadeon R9 290Radeon R9 280XRadeon R9 285Radeon R9 280Radeon R9 270XRadeon R9 270Radeon R7 265Radeon R7 260XRadeon R7 260Radeon R7 250Radeon R7 240Radeon HD 7970Radeon HD 7950Radeon HD 7870 XTRadeon HD 7870Radeon HD 7850Radeon HD 7790Radeon HD 7770Radeon HD 7750Radeon HD 6990Radeon HD 6970Radeon HD 6950Radeon HD 6930Radeon HD 6870Radeon HD 6850Radeon HD 6790Radeon HD 6770Radeon HD 6750Radeon HD 6670 GDDR5Radeon HD 6670 GDDR3Radeon HD 6570 GDDR5Radeon HD 6570 GDDR3Radeon HD 6450 GDDR5Radeon HD 6450 GDDR3Radeon HD 5570 GDDR5Radeon HD 3750Radeon HD 3730Radeon HD 5970Radeon HD 5870Radeon HD 5850Radeon HD 5830Radeon HD 5770Radeon HD 5750Radeon HD 5670Radeon HD 5570Radeon HD 5550Radeon HD 5450Radeon HD 4890Radeon HD 4870 X2Radeon HD 4870Radeon HD 4860Radeon HD 4850 X2Radeon HD 4850Radeon HD 4830Radeon HD 4790Radeon HD 4770Radeon HD 4730Radeon HD 4670Radeon HD 4650Radeon HD 4550Radeon HD 4350Radeon HD 4350Radeon HD 43500 (IGP 890GX) Radeon HD 4200 (IGP)Radeon HD 3870 X2Radeon HD 3870Radeon HD 3850Radeon HD 3690Radeon HD 3650Radeon HD 3470Radeon HD 3450Radeon HD 3300 (IGP)Radeon HD 3200 (IGP)Radeon HD 3100 (IGP)Radeon HD 2900 XT 1Gb GDDR4Radeon HD 2900 XTRadeon HD 2900 PRORadeon HD 2900 GTRadeon HD 2600 XT DUALRadeon HD 2600 XT GDDR4Radeon HD 2600 XTRadeon HD 2600 PRORadeon HD 2400 XTRadeon HD 2400 PRORadeon HD 2350Radeon X1950 CrossFire EditionRadeon X1950 XTXRadeon X1950 XTRadeon X1950 PRO DUALRadeon X1950 PRORadeon X1950 GTRadeon X1900 CrossFire EditionRadeon X1900 XTXRadeon X1900 XTRadeon X1900 GT Rev2Radeon X1900 GTRadeon X1800 CrossFire EditionRadeon X1800 XT PE 512MBRadeon X1800 XTRadeon X1800 XLRadeon X1800 GTORadeon X1650 XTRadeon X1650 GTRadeon X1650 XL DDR3Radeon X1650 XL DDR2Radeon X1650 PRO on RV530XTRadeon X1650 PRO on RV535XTRadeon X1650Radeon X1600 XTRadeon X1600 PRORadeon X1550 PRORadeon X1550Radeon X1550 LERadeon X1300 XT on RV530ProRadeon X1300 XT on RV535ProRadeon X1300 CERadeon X1300 ProRadeon X1300Radeon X1300 LERadeon X1300 HMRadeon X1050Radeon X850 XT Platinum EditionRadeon X850 XT CrossFire EditionRadeon X850 XT Radeon X850 Pro Radeon X800 XT Platinum EditionRadeon X800 XTRadeon X800 CrossFire EditionRadeon X800 XLRadeon X800 GTO 256MBRadeon X800 GTO 128MBRadeon X800 GTO2 256MBRadeon X800Radeon X800 ProRadeon X800 GT 256MBRadeon X800 GT 128MBRadeon X800 SERadeon X700 XTRadeon X700 ProRadeon X700Radeon X600 XTRadeon X600 ProRadeon X550 XTRadeon X550Radeon X300 SE 128MB HM-256MBR adeon X300 SE 32MB HM-128MBRadeon X300Radeon X300 SERadeon 9800 XTRadeon 9800 PRO /DDR IIRadeon 9800 PRO /DDRRadeon 9800Radeon 9800 SE-256 bitRadeon 9800 SE-128 bitRadeon 9700 PRORadeon 9700Radeon 9600 XTRadeon 9600 PRORadeon 9600Radeon 9600 SERadeon 9600 TXRadeon 9550 XTRadeon 9550Radeon 9550 SERadeon 9500 PRORadeon 9500 /128 MBRadeon 9500 /64 MBRadeon 9250Radeon 9200 PRORadeon 9200Radeon 9200 SERadeon 9000 PRORadeon 9000Radeon 9000 XTRadeon 8500 LE / 9100Radeon 8500Radeon 7500Radeon 7200 Radeon LE Radeon DDR OEM Radeon DDR Radeon SDR Radeon VE / 7000Rage 128 GL Rage 128 VR Rage 128 PRO AFRRage 128 PRORage 1283D Rage ProNVIDIAGeForce RTX 4090GeForce RTX 4080 16GBGeForce RTX 4080 12GBGeForce RTX 3090 TiGeForce RTX 3090GeForce RTX 3080 TiGeForce RTX 3080 12GBGeForce RTX 3080GeForce RTX 3070 TiGeForce RTX 3070GeForce RTX 3060 TiGeForce RTX 3060 rev.
2GeForce RTX 3060GeForce RTX 3050GeForce RTX 2080 TiGeForce RTX 2080 SuperGeForce RTX 2080GeForce RTX 2070 SuperGeForce RTX 2070GeForce RTX 2060 SuperGeForce RTX 2060GeForce GTX 1660 TiGeForce GTX 1660 SuperGeForce GTX 1660GeForce GTX 1650 SuperGeForce GTX 1650 GDDR6GeForce GTX 1650 rev.3GeForce GTX 1650 rev.2GeForce GTX 1650GeForce GTX 1630GeForce GTX 1080 TiGeForce GTX 1080GeForce GTX 1070 TiGeForce GTX 1070GeForce GTX 1060GeForce GTX 1060 3GBGeForce GTX 1050 TiGeForce GTX 1050 3GBGeForce GTX 1050GeForce GT 1030GeForce GTX Titan XGeForce GTX 980 TiGeForce GTX 980GeForce GTX 970GeForce GTX 960GeForce GTX 950GeForce GTX TitanGeForce GTX 780 TiGeForce GTX 780GeForce GTX 770GeForce GTX 760GeForce GTX 750 TiGeForce GTX 750GeForce GT 740GeForce GT 730GeForce GTX 690GeForce GTX 680GeForce GTX 670GeForce GTX 660 TiGeForce GTX 660GeForce GTX 650 Ti BoostGeForce GTX 650 TiGeForce GTX 650GeForce GT 640 rev.2GeForce GT 640GeForce GT 630 rev.2GeForce GT 630GeForce GTX 590GeForce GTX 580GeForce GTX 570GeForce GTX 560 TiGeForce GTX 560GeForce GTX 550 TiGeForce GT 520GeForce GTX 480GeForce GTX 470GeForce GTX 465GeForce GTX 460 SEGeForce GTX 460 1024MBGeForce GTX 460 768MBGeForce GTS 450GeForce GT 440 GDDR5GeForce GT 440 GDDR3GeForce GT 430GeForce GT 420GeForce GTX 295GeForce GTX 285GeForce GTX 280GeForce GTX 275GeForce GTX 260 rev.
2GeForce GTX 260GeForce GTS 250GeForce GTS 240GeForce GT 240GeForce GT 230GeForce GT 220GeForce 210Geforce 205GeForce GTS 150GeForce GT 130GeForce GT 120GeForce G100GeForce 9800 GTX+GeForce 9800 GTXGeForce 9800 GTSGeForce 9800 GTGeForce 9800 GX2GeForce 9600 GTGeForce 9600 GSO (G94)GeForce 9600 GSOGeForce 9500 GTGeForce 9500 GSGeForce 9400 GTGeForce 9400GeForce 9300GeForce 8800 ULTRAGeForce 8800 GTXGeForce 8800 GTS Rev2GeForce 8800 GTSGeForce 8800 GTGeForce 8800 GS 768MBGeForce 8800 GS 384MBGeForce 8600 GTSGeForce 8600 GTGeForce 8600 GSGeForce 8500 GT DDR3GeForce 8500 GT DDR2GeForce 8400 GSGeForce 8300GeForce 8200GeForce 8100GeForce 7950 GX2GeForce 7950 GTGeForce 7900 GTXGeForce 7900 GTOGeForce 7900 GTGeForce 7900 GSGeForce 7800 GTX 512MBGeForce 7800 GTXGeForce 7800 GTGeForce 7800 GS AGPGeForce 7800 GSGeForce 7600 GT Rev.2GeForce 7600 GTGeForce 7600 GS 256MBGeForce 7600 GS 512MBGeForce 7300 GT Ver2GeForce 7300 GTGeForce 7300 GSGeForce 7300 LEGeForce 7300 SEGeForce 7200 GSGeForce 7100 GS TC 128 (512)GeForce 6800 Ultra 512MBGeForce 6800 UltraGeForce 6800 GT 256MBGeForce 6800 GT 128MBGeForce 6800 GTOGeForce 6800 256MB PCI-EGeForce 6800 128MB PCI-EGeForce 6800 LE PCI-EGeForce 6800 256MB AGPGeForce 6800 128MB AGPGeForce 6800 LE AGPGeForce 6800 GS AGPGeForce 6800 GS PCI-EGeForce 6800 XTGeForce 6600 GT PCI-EGeForce 6600 GT AGPGeForce 6600 DDR2GeForce 6600 PCI-EGeForce 6600 AGPGeForce 6600 LEGeForce 6200 NV43VGeForce 6200GeForce 6200 NV43AGeForce 6500GeForce 6200 TC 64(256)GeForce 6200 TC 32(128)GeForce 6200 TC 16(128)GeForce PCX5950GeForce PCX 5900GeForce PCX 5750GeForce PCX 5550GeForce PCX 5300GeForce PCX 4300GeForce FX 5950 UltraGeForce FX 5900 UltraGeForce FX 5900GeForce FX 5900 ZTGeForce FX 5900 XTGeForce FX 5800 UltraGeForce FX 5800GeForce FX 5700 Ultra /DDR-3GeForce FX 5700 Ultra /DDR-2GeForce FX 5700GeForce FX 5700 LEGeForce FX 5600 Ultra (rev.
2)GeForce FX 5600 Ultra (rev.1)GeForce FX 5600 XTGeForce FX 5600GeForce FX 5500GeForce FX 5200 UltraGeForce FX 5200GeForce FX 5200 SEGeForce 4 Ti 4800GeForce 4 Ti 4800-SEGeForce 4 Ti 4200-8xGeForce 4 Ti 4600GeForce 4 Ti 4400GeForce 4 Ti 4200GeForce 4 MX 4000GeForce 4 MX 440-8x / 480GeForce 4 MX 460GeForce 4 MX 440GeForce 4 MX 440-SEGeForce 4 MX 420GeForce 3 Ti500GeForce 3 Ti200GeForce 3GeForce 2 Ti VXGeForce 2 TitaniumGeForce 2 UltraGeForce 2 PROGeForce 2 GTSGeForce 2 MX 400GeForce 2 MX 200GeForce 2 MXGeForce 256 DDRGeForce 256Riva TNT 2 UltraRiva TNT 2 PRORiva TNT 2Riva TNT 2 M64Riva TNT 2 Vanta LTRiva TNT 2 VantaRiva TNTRiva 128 ZXRiva 128
You can simultaneously select
up to 10 video cards by holding Ctrl
Reviews of video cards NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060:
-
Review and testing of the video card ASUS Dual GeForce GTX 1060. Comparison with the Radeon RX 580
ASUS DUAL-GTX1060-6G
-
Review and testing of the video card Gigabyte GeForce GTX 1060 WindForce OC 6G
Gigabyte GV-N1060WF2OC-6GD
-
Review and testing Palit GeForce GTX 1060 Jetstream 6GB.
Comparison of the performance of different generations of Intel Core i5 processors in modern games
Palit GeForce GTX 1060 Jetstream 6GB
-
Inno3D iChill GeForce GTX 1060 X3 review and new comparison with Radeon RX 480
Inno3D iChill GeForce GTX 1060 X3
-
Review and testing of the ASUS ROG Strix GeForce GTX 1060 graphics card
ASUS ROG STRIX-GTX1060-O6G-GAMING
-
Testing the GeForce GTX 1060 on the example of the MSI GTX 1060 Gaming X 6G video card
MSI GeForce GTX 1060 Gaming X 6G
Comparison of AMD and NVIDIA video cards in Linux: what to use?
There are many factors that distinguish them from each other. On Windows, speed is all that matters — Nvidia graphics cards (GPU) are generally faster than AMD. But on Linux, there are other things to keep in mind.
But what to choose for Linux — AMD or Nvidia graphics card?
Is an Intel graphics card the best option for Linux?
Before comparing AMD and Nvidia, it is worth considering the main alternative.
The only graphics card vendor you can be sure of is Intel Integrated Graphics. While it might not be as fast, Intel’s integrated graphics have improved a lot. In addition, compared to Nvidia or AMD graphics cards, it is very economical.
Intel support is available as premium with fully open source drivers for Linux. Many games can be played too, if not on dedicated graphics cards. You are also sure that the Wayland display server is working if you want to test it, thanks to its open source nature.
Video Card Drivers: Proprietary vs. Open Source Comparison
There are two types of drivers you can install to make your video cards work: proprietary (proprietary) or open source drivers. While both have good and bad sides, they differ if you are using an Nvidia or AMD graphics card.
For best results, it is always best to use proprietary drivers. But if you have philosophical objections to proprietary drivers, open source alternatives are more attractive.
Should I use an Nvidia graphics card for Linux?
Although there are open source Nvidia proprietary drivers and proprietary drivers for Linux, the best performance is achieved with proprietary drivers. Nouveau, an open source driver for Nvidia cards, usually produces worse results than its own counterpart.
Much of Project nouveau’s work is done by reverse engineering Nvidia’s proprietary driver. This is similar to how the Wine project recreates a Windows environment to run applications like Install Adobe Photoshop on Linux. Essentially, the developer looks at the results the application provides and works backwards from there.
This has its drawbacks, especially in terms of speed and compatibility. Nvidia’s proprietary drivers are much faster than Nouveau’s, especially with newer graphics cards.
Another drawback is that Nouveau lacks what the proprietary driver has: resync. This allows the GPU to work harder and therefore provide better performance (at the expense of more power).
Unfortunately, only a few Nvidia GPUs can use this option with Nouveau installed, and none of them are very new.
The speed difference is huge, especially for new graphics cards. Appear Some Criteria Proprietary drivers can deliver performance up to nine times faster than their open source counterparts.
Simply put, Nouveau fits the desktop environment, but games have a different path.
AMD — the best graphics card choice for Linux?
For the most part, it doesn’t matter which drivers you install for AMD graphics cards. It is well supported across the board, although using open source drivers is the preferred method. In fact, open source drivers are used in many cases (AMDGPU for new cards, Radeon for older cards). On a par with their own analogues or faster!
Compared to the open source Nvidia driver, new graphics cards are better supported. This is partly due to AMD’s support for an open source community that provides documentation and personnel for driver development.
But while AMD’s open source drivers are decent in every way, overall performance will still be noticeably slower than when using an Nvidia graphics card with proprietary drivers.
AMD vs Nvidia comparison: which is better for switching graphics?
Almost all laptops and desktops have an integrated Intel graphics card. Discrete Nvidia and AMD GPUs are optional add-ons for laptops, but can be manually added to desktops.
Graphics switching is the ability of the computer to decide which graphics processor to use. For basic tasks such as web browsing and word processing, the Intel GPU is chosen. For games, video editing, etc. uses a discrete GPU.
Open source proprietary Nvidia and AMD drivers for Linux support graphics switching.
Does AMD or Nvidia support the Wayland Display Server?
Wayland Display Server This is an integral part of Linux development and is available on most major Linux desktops.
AMD and Intel graphics cards work with Wayland using proprietary open source drivers.
Nvidia has a different story.
Although development of this server is expected by 2021, the Nvidia proprietary driver only works with Gnome’s Wayland implementation.
The Wayland configuration tools require a special Application Programming Interface (API) that is implemented by the graphics card driver. The most widely used API is currently called GBM (Generic Buffer Management). As long as you use an open source driver (AMDGPU/Radeon/nouveau), Wayland will work.
Because the proprietary Nvidia driver uses a different API (EGLStreams), things are different. The Gnome desktop is the main exception. Likewise, the open source alternative does not support Wayland.
What is the best video card for Linux: Intel, AMD or Nvidia?
For Linux desktops, this is a much simpler option.
Nvidia graphics cards are more expensive than AMD and have a performance advantage. But using AMD guarantees superior compatibility and a selection of reliable drivers, whether open source or proprietary.
Same with Intel, although this solution is slower.
If you need Wayland support, AMD and Intel are the most reliable options. Otherwise, try your luck with Nvidia. It hasn’t had a good relationship with Linux over the years, but the rise of Linux gaming is changing that.
Have you made a decision? you How to install proprietary graphics card drivers in Linux.
Source
AMD vs Nvidia: which is better?
The authors of this review decided to compare AMD and Nvidia in order to find out who will become the undisputed champion. For the most avid gamers, this rivalry is no less important than, say, the rivalry between Shakhtar Donetsk and Dynamo Kyiv, between Coca-Cola and Pepsi, between Marvel and DC Comics. Who makes the best processors: AMD or Nvidia? There are several common perceptions in our society about the strengths and weaknesses of each of these brands, and this comparison aims to test all of these points of view.
Company information
AMD
- Initially, the company became known as a manufacturer of computing processors ( CPU ), however, then firmly entered the graphics processor market ( GPU ).
- Present in the CPU and GPU markets, occupying second positions in these markets, while Intel and Nvidia occupy the first positions in these markets, respectively.
- Produces superior products in the lower and middle grades.
- Can run high performance applications.
- Generates more heat because it uses larger memory arrays to improve performance.
Nvidia
- From the early days of its existence, the GPU has been involved and to this day Nvidia graphics cards occupy the first position in this sector.
- Significant presence in the GPU market and a small presence in the CPU market.
- Produces excellent mid to high end GPUs.
- Created the only GPU that is truly capable of running high performance applications such as 2K and 4K games.
- Generates less power and consumes less energy.
Price
In the gamer community, AMD is considered to offer better value for money than Nvidia. While this is generally a fair estimate, the reality is a bit more complicated. In the list of mainstream models, Nvidia processors are often significantly more expensive than their older generation counterparts. But part of that can be explained by the fact that Nvidia just recently downsized its new generation Turing. However, it’s hard to ignore the fact that the RTX 2080 Ti costs almost twice as much as the GTX 1080 Ti, or that the standard RTX 2080 costs around $800.
However, at Nvidia’s core conference, the company made a promise to cut prices, so things may change soon. And Nvidia is already offering CPUs for as little as $150. Right now AMD is offering significantly better prices on most models, but that may change when their next generation Navi processor hits the market and Nvidia makes some changes to its pricing policy. As for high-performance gaming graphics cards, the discrepancy becomes less noticeable here.
AMD’s high-end Radeon VII costs just $100 less than its Nvidia counterpart, despite not quite meeting the same key specs.
Winner: AMD
Performance
Nvidia Corporation may charge premium prices for their gaming graphics cards, but many argue that this is their right. The best GPUs from Nvidia are impressive and mesmerizing. The RT 2080 Ti may cost almost a fortune, but there is nothing else like it on the market! The 11GB GDDR6 memory paired with new ray tracing and AI-driven sampling (more on that below) makes it very usable for many generations of games to come. And while the Radeon VII looks pretty much comparable in terms of performance, gamers will definitely notice the difference when they start using DirectX 12.
In short, Nvidia processors are simply more powerful, especially for gaming. They’re better at multitasking, able to perform exceptionally complex tasks, and do so with significantly less power. And while AMD offers more memory in its lower-end line of processors, that also means they overheat faster, so they just can’t compete with each other at a higher level.
And while the power gap is slowly narrowing, Nvidia still has a clear lead in this metric.
Winner: Nvidia
Adaptive Sync
Both Nvidia and AMD love to use a lot of fancy technologies, but users shouldn’t overlook adaptive sync, represented by G-Sync and FreeSync, respectively. These technologies make the most of the monitor’s refresh rate to reduce tearing, ensure consistent frame rates, and generally just provide a more enjoyable gaming experience. And since the two technologies mentioned above are only compatible with cards from their respective manufacturers, the difference should be taken into account.
Users and experts disagree here, as the two companies have achieved very different results with these technologies. G-Sync monitors work exclusively with monitors that support G-Sync, and this is considered a premium feature, often only available on more expensive models. FreeSync, in contrast, has higher compatibility and will work with most monitors $130 and up.
But, as is generally the case with these two companies, AMD technology sacrifices power for affordability. G-Sync is the best option, and the higher standards applied to G-Sync monitors mean they tend to really bring adaptive sync all it’s worth.
Winner: Draw based on how much money you are willing to spend.
Software
Today’s video cards are more than just a device for displaying pictures on the screen, which means that the most advanced gamers want to customize their functionality. This means that the software platforms that each company uses are also important. Previously, the winner here was clear. Nvidia’s software came with a number of useful features that AMD simply lacked. But in recent years, AMD has managed to bridge this gap, and fewer gaming companies are creating settings specifically for one or another graphics card manufacturer.
However, by no means should we say that Nvidia’s GeForce Experience has ceased to impress. Driver updates are done automatically and you can take screenshots and stream videos right through its interface.
And despite the fact that AMD has already begun to include more and more game optimization features in its software (and it must be said that it is doing a good job), they are still trying to catch up with their more experienced competitor in this matter. The GeForce Experience optimization automation is exceptional and is a great way to get the best gaming experience without being a techie.
However, there are some interesting tweaks in the latest version of AMD Radeon Software Adrenalin. The program not only offers automatic overclocking, but also allows you to stream games directly to your mobile device, including support for virtual reality capabilities.
Winner: Nvidia , however, her status as a winner hangs in the balance.
Special Features
In terms of universal features, AMD has done a great job of catching up with Nvidia. However, that was in the past. The advent of the Turing generation brought with it two fundamental game-changers: ray tracing and artificial intelligence-driven sampling.
The former provides an unprecedented level of detail in light rendering, and while it hasn’t been fully implemented in current-gen games yet, the demos Nvidia showed off at CES were amazing. But the greatest impetus can come from Turing’s artificial intelligence core. Through machine learning, this artificial intelligence can intuitively improve the quality of graphics based on the analysis of shared experience.
This is where timing was an advantage for Nvidia. However, there are rumors that future AMD graphics cards will use ray tracing. However, these graphics cards have yet to be released, and there is still no information about the sophisticated artificial intelligence that is included in the latest Nvidia processors. And while none of these technologies have been widely adopted by the gaming community yet, we can expect things to change soon as developers can work with them more comfortably, and the next generation of consoles can fulfill our expectations related to cross compatible games.
Winner : Nvidia
Key differences between AMD and Nvidia
Let’s discuss the main key differences between AMD and Nvidia.
- Performance: Radeon was the original product of ATI (Array Technology Inc), while ATI was Nvidia’s main competitor. After AMD acquired ATI, two major players emerged in the GPU market: Nvidia and AMD. The Radeon brand took over GeForce and became their competitor. AMD has a smaller share of the GPU market, just as it has a smaller share of the CPU market, where it competes with Intel. The benchmark when comparing the performance of GPUs can be the number of frames rendered in a given amount of time and the speed at which games like Crysis launch. In both cases, the indicators are not the same for different models of the same brand and may vary.
- Hardware: Nvidia uses cutting-edge technology and is renowned for its superior performance.
The company’s graphics cards generate less heat during operation, as less electricity is consumed. AMD makes up for these gaps with its processing power, using more memory and consuming more power. This was a gap that AMD closed in their new products. - Technology: Nvidia uses CUDA (Unified Device Computing Architecture) cores and AMD uses Stream processors. There are no major performance differences between the two cores.
- Software: Finely tuned software impacts performance and closes hardware gaps. Both companies update drivers frequently, with Nvidia showing slightly more consistency and stability. If these differences are not taken into account, it can be said that in this area the companies work on equal terms.
- Streaming and recording: Apart from some improvement in video quality in the streaming and recording process in the case of Nvidia, both players are on par.
- V-Sync Substitution: This feature prevents screen tearing by synchronizing the monitor’s refresh rate with the frame rate.
Both AMD Freesync and Nvidia Gsync provide solutions that are comparable in performance. Freesync is the best solution for cost and Gsync for overall performance.
Verdict
So which one is the winner? Nobody. While Nvidia can be seen as a leader in most categories, AMD’s pricing also matters a lot. A high-end Nvidia gaming graphics card will cost quite a lot, and the buyer may also need to invest heavily in a reliable processor, motherboard, and monitor to get the most out of the graphics card. All in all, if you want the very best, buy Nvidia. If you can do without high-end products, AMD has some fantastic options, especially for sub-$200 graphics cards.
The differences between the products of these two brands will most likely only decrease in the coming years. AMD has made some promising moves in the high-end market, and Nvidia has already promised price cuts in the coming months. Keep a close eye on the market as the release of AMD’s next generation will indeed pave the way for the next battle of the CPU wars era.
Comparison of video cards by performance and features online
Processors
Video cards
Processors
Video cards
Smartphone
TOP 10 video cards of this month
AMD Radeon HD 7990
NVIDIA Quadro M3000M
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Mobile
NVIDIA GEFORCE RTX 3060
AMD Radeon Pro 460
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Super
AMD Radeon RX 580
AMD Radeon RX 590
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 480
NVIDIA Quadro RTX 6000
The best video cards of 2022 in benchmarks
Modern and high-performance video cards in synthetic tests. How do you know if a video card is good or not? It is enough to simply do this by studying the technical characteristics, as well as comparing it with a competitive model. As a general rule, the best graphics cards score the highest in benchmarks that aren’t wrong.:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/21995045/a8LqARC.png)
3DMark Ice Storm GPU
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Ti
100%
NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Mobile
96%
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090
95%
AMD Radeon RX 5600XT
95%
NVIDIA TITAN RTX
94%
3DMark Cloud Gate GPU
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 SLI Mobile
100%
NVIDIA TITAN RTX
99%
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Ti
95%
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 SLI Mobile
89%
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 SLI Mobile
88%
3DMark Fire Strike Score
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Ti
100%
NVIDIA TITAN RTX
91%
AMD Radeon R9 Fury
89%
AMD Radeon RX 5700XT
84%
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 SLI Mobile
84%
SPECviewperf 12 — Siemens NX
NVIDIA Quadro P5200
100%
NVIDIA Quadro P5000 Mobile
77%
NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Max-Q
69%
NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Mobile
68%
NVIDIA Quadro P3200
58%
GeekBench 5 CUDA
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti
100%
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090
100%
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080
84%
NVIDIA RTX A5000
80%
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070
62%
SPECviewperf 12 — Showcase
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Ti
100%
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti
83%
NVIDIA Titan X Pascal
73%
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Super
71%
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070
68%
Passmark GPU
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Ti
100%
NVIDIA Quadro RTX 6000
90%
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Super
89%
NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000
88%
NVIDIA TITAN RTX
87%
Comparison of video cards
Actual video card performance comparison combinations at the moment, which were most often used by our visitors.
They are a recommendation for a quick selection of models and are presented to you in a familiarization format.
Online performance test
CMPTEK.com/en — a unique service for comparing the performance of video cards based on technical specifications and ratings as a result of testing using synthetic benchmarks. We have developed a project that was created primarily to help you choose and buy the fastest graphics card by comparing two models.
NVIDIA graphics card comparison
Our graphics card comparison service will help those who are trying to understand the advantageous features of a particular NVIDIA brand model. Thus, it is enough to simply choose model #1 and model #2 to understand which graphics card will be faster in performance, games and other work applications.
Most often, our users compare NVIDIA GeForce 3060, 1650, 1660, 1060, 3080, 3070 and 3050 graphics cards.
AMD 9 graphics cards comparison0150
AMD is a global manufacturer of computer components that set the trend for many competitive brands.
Already today, we can safely say that AMD video cards, to one degree or another, are almost equal to the top representatives of NVIDIA.
Here you can compare AMD graphics cards (especially the popular RX series) and find the best model for your needs. The service displays strengths and weaknesses, on the basis of which it is not difficult to draw a conclusion.
Performance comparison of NVIDIA and AMD graphics cards online
The CMPTEK service provides the most detailed database of NVIDIA and AMD graphics cards that you can compare and understand how they perform in games or other work applications, such as rendering 3D models (we have a wide selection of benchmarks for this).
It is the benchmarks of video cards that display a real comparison of performance by points.
Which graphics card is better AMD or NVIDIA? (AMD vs NVIDIA GPU Comparison)
Some arguments in the technical world can overheat. And one of the contentious discussions that the gaming industry has faced is which graphics processing unit (GPU) is better — NVIDIA or AMD.
As with any heated discussion, there are many different points that make both GPUs stand out. So, without accepting any favors, we’re going to lay out a clear difference between AMD and Nvidia . Before we begin, let’s first understand the GPU and its importance in a computer.
Message contents: —
What is a video card?
A graphics card also known as a graphics adapter, the graphics controller is responsible for rendering the image to your monitor. And this is achieved by converting the data into a signal that your monitor can understand. This means that the better the graphics card results, the better and smoother the image, which is especially important for gamers and video editors.
GPU means the GPU, the brain of the graphics card, which creates the visual effects you see on the screen. The GPU works as a translator, it takes the data coming from the CPU and converts it into images. More complex visuals, like in high resolution games, require more complex and faster GPUs to process the data stream.
A graphics card is hardware in general, while a graphics processor is a chip, part of a video card, or similar embedded device, which stands for Graphics Processing Unit.
The integrated graphics processor is a graphics chipset built into the motherboard. Where Dedicated GPU is the second GPU installed on the motherboard. If you’re talking about a PC, then the integrated GPU will most likely be an Intel chip, while the dedicated GPU will be an Nvidia or AMD chip. Here’s the difference between an integrated GPU and a dedicated GPU.
Is GPU more powerful than CPU?
GPUs are more powerful than CPUs because GPUs have a much higher number of CPU cores than regular CPUs. We don’t use them for everything because they require that type of teamwork where overwhelming numbers of employees lead to increased productivity.
The difference between AMD and NVIDIA
There are two main manufacturers of discrete graphics cards: AMD and Nvidia.
Both AMD and NVIDIA have been making graphics cards for years and are constantly pushing the boundaries of GPU technology. Both AMD and NVIDIA have the same end goal: to provide smooth and fast visual performance. However, each company uses its own approach to achieve this goal. Here we have a simple comparison between AMD and NVIDIA to help you choose the right one.
AMD vs NVIDIA GPU performance
When we talk about GPUs, we must first consider the performance factor. First, you need to determine the performance benchmark of the GPU, such as how many frames per second it can deliver or how it can run Crysis at medium to high levels. Here, we cannot express the performance of both GPUs in one line as the performance varies from model to model. But with Nvidia and AMD, the performance graph is like a heart monitor: one minute up, another minute down. So, there is no clear comparison.
AMD vs NVIDIA GPU Price
This is a very clear factor where AMD wins by a large margin.
AMD graphics cards are always worth their price as they offer more at a limited price. However, at low rates, it is the other way around, as if you have a moderate budget of $200-$300, then everything becomes different. In this price range, AMD only offers two options, while Nvidia offers many high-end GPUs. If you want high CPU power, then you will end up paying a higher price as well.
AMD vs. NVIDIA GPU Hardware technology
Okay, so there’s no dispute that Nvidia used the technology better than AMD. Their GPU delivers high performance, performs better on computing tasks, generates less heat, and consumes less power. However, AMD makes up for this by increasing memory bandwidth on its less expensive models. But still, you cannot foresee that they produce more heat and consume additional power.
AMD versus NVIDIA GPU cores
CUDA cores and stream processors are two different technologies used by Nvidia and AMD respectively. So, both technologies are the same and it is not possible to make specific performance estimates here.
After all, it’s all about software optimization. You will only notice a slight difference when certain technologies come into context, such as Nvidia PhysX or Nvidia HairWorks.
AMD vs NVIDIA GPU Software
This is the section where you will find some sharp differences, because every company wants to create a monopoly in the software market. In video cards, drivers and control panels are considered instead of software. We can’t comment on drivers as both Nvidia and AMD release new drivers all the time, but if you want an answer, we can say that Nvidia has the upper hand.
Speaking of control panels, if you pair AMD and Nvidia control panels together, you will automatically see that the Nvidia control panel is out of date. On the other hand, the AMD Control Center looks very trendy and new with a clean and modern design. It has eye-soothing blue background effects that make it look very modern.
AMD vs NVIDIA GPU Features
As it has already been revealed, you will need FPS when you want to record or stream gaming sessions.
So, if you’re willing to invest in a good quality capture card, then you’re good to go, otherwise you want the decent frame rates that GPU drivers offer. For that you have Shadowplay and ReLive for Nvidia and AMD respectively. Among both features, Shadowplay has the edge as it can record and stream better with support for higher bitrates. Also, they can both be the same.
So which is better?
None. Nobody. Yes, because in the end it all depends on your requirements and budget. In this Nvidia vs AMD post, we found out that both of them are great graphics cards with some great features. So the bottom line is that AMD might be a good option for users on a budget, while Nvidia is a graphics card for professional users. Now the question is, which user are you?
- Compare Intel Core i3, i5 and i7 processors. Which one to buy?
- Integrated or dedicated graphics card, which one to use and why?
- SSD vs HDD: speed vs. performance comparison
- What is the difference between 32-bit and 64-bit Windows 10 and Processor (CPU)
- Difference between static RAM and dynamic RAM, which is faster?
Comparison of video card chips by performance: Nvidia, AMD and Intel
|
Below is a table that will allow you to evaluate the performance of video cards, find equivalents at the class level.
|
We would like to draw your attention to the fact that in different applications graphics solutions from different manufacturers assigned to the same performance class may give different results. This is due both to optimization for certain microinstructions, and to a number of other reasons. Also, performance can «walk» from one video card to another video card built on the same chip, but with higher-performance memory, operating frequencies, and proven drivers. 
03)
